Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32747878›Full record

ArticleExtended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference2020

Understanding Digital Checklist Use Through Team Communication.

Angela Mastrianni, Leah Kulp, Emily Mapelli, Aleksandra Sarcevic

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Transitioning Cognitive Aids into Decision Support Platforms: Requirements and Design Guidelines.ACM transactions on computer-human interaction : a publication of the Association for Computing Machinery · 2023
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Angela MastrianniDrexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Leah KulpDrexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Emily MapelliDrexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Aleksandra SarcevicDrexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Drexel University · US

Funding

Intention-aware Recommender System for Improving Trauma Resuscitation OutcomesR01LM011834 · NLM · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BURD, RANDALL S., MARSIC, IVAN · 2014 to 2023
$4.7M
Analysis of Factors Associated with Clinical Checklist ComplianceR03HS026057 · AHRQ · DREXEL UNIVERSITY · PI SARCEVIC, ALEKSANDRA · 2018 to 2019
$100k
AHRQ HHS R03 HS026057NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introducing technology support in a complex, team-based work setting requires a study of teamwork effects on technology use. In this paper, we present our initial analysis of team communications in a trauma resuscitation setting, where we deployed a digital checklist to support trauma team leaders in guiding patient care. By analyzing speech transcripts, checklist interaction logs, and videos of 15 resuscitations, we identified several tensions that arose from the use of a checklist in a team-based process with multi-step tasks. The tensions included incorrect markings of in-progress tasks as completed, failure to mark completed tasks due to missed communications, failure to record planned tasks, and difficulties in recording dynamic values. From these findings, we discuss design implications for checklist design for dynamic, team-based activities.

Indexed as

communication analysisdecision support systemsDigital checklistemergency medicineteam communicationsteamworktrauma resuscitationvideo analysis

Identifiers

PMID32747878
PMCPMC7397407
OpenAlexW3030101941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.