ArticleHuman factors2021
Why and How to Approach User Experience in Safety-Critical Domains: The Example of Health Care.
Article in Human factors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- User-Centered Development of a Digital Health Service for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Risk Stratification: Usability Study.JMIR diabetes · 2026Article
- The Development of a Web-Based Application to Support Informal Caregivers of Individuals With Head and Neck Cancer: Human-Centered Design Approach.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Can you see what I see? Examining the Impact of Smart Glasses on Communication Dynamics in Distributed Emergency Medical Teams.Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction · 2025Article
- Development of web- and mobile-based shared decision-making tools in the neurological intensive care unit.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025Review
- The ANEMONE: Theoretical Foundations for UX Evaluation of Action and Intention Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo highlight the importance of the personal experience of users who interact with technology in safety-critical domains and summarize three interaction concepts and the associated theories that provide the means for addressing user experience.
backgroundIn health care, the dominant concepts of interaction are based on theories arising from classic cognitive psychology. These concepts focus mainly on safety and efficiency, with too little consideration being given to user experience.
methodUsers in complex socio-technical and safety-critical domains such as health care interact with many technological devices. Enhancing the user experience could improve the design of technology, enhance the well-being of staff, and contribute to modern safety management. We summarize concepts of "interaction" based on modern theories of human-computer interaction, which include the personal experience of users as an important construct. RESULTS AND
conclusionActivity theory, embodiment, and interaction as experience provide a theoretical foundation for considering user experience in safety-critical domains. Using an example from anesthesiology, we demonstrate how each theory provides a unique but complementary view on experience. Finally, the methodological possibilities for considering personal experience in design and evaluations vary among the theories. APPLICATION: Considering user experience in health care and potentially other safety-critical domains can provide an additional means of optimizing interaction with technology, contributing to the well-being of staff, and improving safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.