Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30327290›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2018

Data Visualizations to Support Health Practitioners' Provision of Personalized Care for Patients With Cancer and Multiple Chronic Conditions: User-Centered Design Study.

Uba Backonja, Sarah C Haynes, Katherine K Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Know-Me: A Toolkit for Designing Personalised Dementia Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Uba BackonjaNursing and Healthcare Leadership, University of Washington Tacoma, Tacoma, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5997-549X
Sarah C HaynesBetty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5399-9725
Katherine K KimBetty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5766-3938

Funding

Center for Innovation in Point of Care Technologies for the Future of Cancer CareU54EB015403 · NIBIB · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI KLAPPERICH, CATHERINE M. · 2012 to 2016
$8.9M
NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB015403
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere exists a challenge of understanding and integrating various types of data collected to support the health of individuals with multiple chronic conditions engaging in cancer care. Data visualization has the potential to address this challenge and support personalized cancer care.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to assess the health care practitioners' perceptions of and feedback regarding visualizations developed to support the care of individuals with multiple chronic conditions engaging in cancer care.

methodsMedical doctors (n=4) and registered nurses (n=4) providing cancer care at an academic medical center in the western United States provided feedback on visualization mock-ups. Mock-up designs were guided by current health informatics and visualization literature and the Munzner Nested Model for Visualization Design. User-centered design methods, a mock patient persona, and a scenario were used to elicit insights from participants. Directed content analysis was used to identify themes from session transcripts. Means and SDs were calculated for health care practitioners' rankings of overview visualizations.

resultsThemes identified were data elements, supportive elements, confusing elements, interpretation, and use of visualization. Overall, participants found the visualizations useful and with the potential to provide personalized care. Use of color, reference lines, and familiar visual presentations (calendars, line graphs) were noted as helpful in interpreting data.

conclusionsVisualizations guided by a framework and literature can support health care practitioners' understanding of data for individuals with multiple chronic conditions engaged in cancer care. This understanding has the potential to support the provision of personalized care.

Indexed as

cancer care facilitiesinformaticspatient-centered carepatient-generated health dataprecision medicinevisualization

Identifiers

PMID30327290
PMCPMC6231796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.