Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35700016›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Usability Issues in Evidence-Based Psychosocial Interventions and Implementation Strategies: Cross-project Analysis.

Sean A Munson, Emily C Friedman, Katie Osterhage, Ryan Allred, Michael D Pullmann, Patricia A Areán, Aaron R Lyon, UW ALACRITY Center Researchers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. HCI Contributions in Mental Health: A Modular Framework to Guide Psychosocial Intervention Design.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Digital and precision clinical trials: innovations for testing mental health medications, devices, and psychosocial treatments.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Sean A MunsonDepartment of Human Centered Design & Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0472-6138
Emily C FriedmanAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9520-0499
Katie OsterhageAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9112-2262
Ryan AllredAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6804-9447
Michael D PullmannAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8404-864X
Patricia A AreánAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5971-6319
Aaron R LyonAdvanced Laboratories for Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness (ALACRITY) Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3657-5060
UW ALACRITY Center Researchers *See Acknowledgments, .

Funding

UW ALACRITY Center for Psychosocial Interventions ResearchP50MH115837 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Michael David Pullmann · 2018 to 2026
$18.2M
NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH115837
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople often prefer evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs) for mental health care; however, these interventions frequently remain unavailable to people in nonspecialty or integrated settings, such as primary care and schools. Previous research has suggested that usability, a concept from human-centered design, could support an understanding of the barriers to and facilitators of the successful adoption of EBPIs and support the redesign of EBPIs and implementation strategies.

objectiveThis study aimed to identify and categorize usability issues in EBPIs and their implementation strategies.

methodsWe adapted a usability issue analysis and reporting format from a human-centered design. A total of 13 projects supported by the National Institute of Mental Health-funded Accelerating the Reach and Impact of Treatments for Youth and Adults with Mental Illness Center at the University of Washington used this format to describe usability issues for EBPIs and implementation strategies with which they were working. Center researchers used iterative affinity diagramming and coding processes to identify usability issue categories. On the basis of these categories and the underlying issues, we propose heuristics for the design or redesign of EBPIs and implementation strategies.

resultsThe 13 projects reported a total of 90 usability issues, which we categorized into 12 categories, including complex and/or cognitively overwhelming, required time exceeding available time, incompatibility with interventionist preference or practice, incompatibility with existing workflow, insufficient customization to clients/recipients, intervention buy-in (value), interventionist buy-in (trust), overreliance on technology, requires unavailable infrastructure, inadequate scaffolding for client/recipient, inadequate training and scaffolding for interventionists, and lack of support for necessary communication. These issues range from minor inconveniences that affect a few interventionists or recipients to severe issues that prevent all interventionists or recipients in a setting from completing part or all of the intervention. We propose 12 corresponding heuristics to guide EBPIs and implementation strategy designers in preventing and addressing these usability issues.

conclusionsUsability issues were prevalent in the studied EBPIs and implementation strategies. We recommend using the lens of usability evaluation to understand and address barriers to the effective use and reach of EBPIs and implementation strategies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/14990.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersPsychosocial InterventionAdolescentAdultHumansUnited Statesevidence-based psychosocial interventionshuman-centered designimplementation scienceimplementation strategiesmental healthusability

Identifiers

PMID35700016
PMCPMC9240934

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.