ArticleJMIR human factors2022
Assessing the Usability of a Clinical Decision Support System: Heuristic Evaluation.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Usability evaluation methods for hospital information systems: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Optimizing Clinical Decision Support System Functionality by Leveraging Specific Human-Computer Interaction Elements: Insights From a Systematic Review.JMIR human factors · 2025Pooled it
- SignBridge Bilingual Sign Language Avatar-Construction Principles and Experts Quality Assessment.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Utilization of Decision Support Systems: The Interplay Between Technology, Users, and the Healthcare Environment.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Usability of Digital Health Technologies in the US: Results from a Descriptive National Online Survey of Nurses.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2026Article
- The relationship between self-awareness skills of healthcare workers and healthcare data quality: a cross-sectional study in Tanzanian regional referral hospitals.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Usability and Acceptance Testing of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring System for People Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Optimizing pharmacogenomic clinical decision support: a usability study of epic's Genomic-Indicators.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2026Article
- Leveraging Dual Usability Methods to Evaluate Clinical Decision Support Among Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Comparison and Evaluation of AI-Powered Healthcare Mobile Applications' Usability.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Capabilities of computerized decision support systems supporting the nursing process in hospital settings: a scoping review.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Diagnosis: Innovations and Impact on Disease Screenings.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Usability assessments in clinical decision support systems.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2025Article
- Electronic health record system use and documentation burden of acute and critical care nurse clinicians: a mixed-methods study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Design and evaluation of a serious video game to treat preschool children with speech sound disorders.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Revolutionizing Cardiology through Artificial Intelligence-Big Data from Proactive Prevention to Precise Diagnostics and Cutting-Edge Treatment-A Comprehensive Review of the Past 5 Years.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Formative evaluation of an emergency department clinical decision support system for agitation symptoms: a study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular diseases: diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives.European journal of medical research · 2023Review
- iSurgARy: A mobile augmented reality solution for ventriculostomy in resource-limited settings.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoor usability is a primary cause of unintended consequences related to the use of electronic health record (EHR) systems, which negatively impacts patient safety. Due to the cost and time needed to carry out iterative evaluations, many EHR components, such as clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), have not undergone rigorous usability testing prior to their deployment in clinical practice. Usability testing in the predeployment phase is crucial to eliminating usability issues and preventing costly fixes that will be needed if these issues are found after the system's implementation.
objectiveThis study presents an example application of a systematic evaluation method that uses clinician experts with human-computer interaction (HCI) expertise to evaluate the usability of an electronic clinical decision support (CDS) intervention prior to its deployment in a randomized controlled trial.
methodsWe invited 6 HCI experts to participate in a heuristic evaluation of our CDS intervention. Each expert was asked to independently explore the intervention at least twice. After completing the assigned tasks using patient scenarios, each expert completed a heuristic evaluation checklist developed by Bright et al based on Nielsen's 10 heuristics. The experts also rated the overall severity of each identified heuristic violation on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 indicates no problems and 4 indicates a usability catastrophe. Data from the experts' coded comments were synthesized, and the severity of each identified usability heuristic was analyzed.
resultsThe 6 HCI experts included professionals from the fields of nursing (n=4), pharmaceutical science (n=1), and systems engineering (n=1). The mean overall severity scores of the identified heuristic violations ranged from 0.66 (flexibility and efficiency of use) to 2.00 (user control and freedom and error prevention), in which scores closer to 0 indicate a more usable system. The heuristic principle user control and freedom was identified as the most in need of refinement and, particularly by nonnursing HCI experts, considered as having major usability problems. In response to the heuristic match between system and the real world, the experts pointed to the reversed direction of our system's pain scale scores (1=severe pain) compared to those commonly used in clinical practice (typically 1=mild pain); although this was identified as a minor usability problem, its refinement was repeatedly emphasized by nursing HCI experts.
conclusionsOur heuristic evaluation process is simple and systematic and can be used at multiple stages of system development to reduce the time and cost needed to establish the usability of a system before its widespread implementation. Furthermore, heuristic evaluations can help organizations develop transparent reporting protocols for usability, as required by Title IV of the 21st Century Cures Act. Testing of EHRs and CDSSs by clinicians with HCI expertise in heuristic evaluation processes has the potential to reduce the frequency of testing while increasing its quality, which may reduce clinicians' cognitive workload and errors and enhance the adoption of EHRs and CDSSs.
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.