Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36037053›Full record

ArticleHuman-Computer Interaction. Theoretical Approaches and Design Methods : Thematic Area, HCI 2022, Held as Part of the 24th HCI International Conference, HCII 2022, Virtual Event, June 26-July 1, 2022, Proceedings, Part I

A Coding Framework for Usability Evaluation of Digital Health Technologies.

Mahdi Ebnali, Lauren R Kennedy-Metz, Heather M Conboy, Lori A Clarke, Leon J Osterweil, George Avrunin, Christian Miccile, Maria Arshanskiy, Annette Phillips, Marco A Zenati and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human-Computer Interaction. Theoretical Approaches and Design Methods : Thematic Area, HCI 2022, Held as Part of the 24th HCI International Conference, HCII 2022, Virtual Event, June 26-July 1, 2022, Proceedings, Part I. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Co-Creation in the Development of Digital Therapeutics: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  4. 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

11 authors.

Mahdi EbnaliHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Lauren R Kennedy-MetzMedical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery Lab, Division of Cardiac Surgery, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Heather M ConboyHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Lori A ClarkeHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Leon J OsterweilHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
George AvruninHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Christian MiccileHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Maria ArshanskiyLaboratory for Advanced Software Engineering Research, Manning College of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA.
Annette PhillipsLaboratory for Advanced Software Engineering Research, Manning College of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA.
Marco A ZenatiMedical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery Lab, Division of Cardiac Surgery, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Roger D DiasHuman Factors and Cognitive Engineering Lab, STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

Developing Standardized Intraoperative Process Models to Enhance Surgical SafetyR01HL126896 · NHLBI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI ZENATI, MARCO A. · 2016 to 2023
$3.7M
Intelligent Perfusion Digital Twin to Improve Patient Safety and Quality in Cardiac SurgeryR01HL157457 · NHLBI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Roger Daglius Dias, Matthew Gombolay · 2022 to 2026
$3.0M
A ROBOT-ASSISTED PERFUSION SYSTEM TO IMPROVE PATIENT SAFETY IN THE CARDIAC OPERATING ROOMR56HL157457 · NHLBI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI DIAS, ROGER DAGLIUS, GOMBOLAY, MATTHEW · 2021 to 2021
$842k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL126896NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL157457NHLBI NIH HHS R56 HL157457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have reported low adherence and high resistance from clinicians to adopt digital health technologies into clinical practice, particularly the use of computer-based clinical decision support systems. Poor usability and lack of integration with the clinical workflow have been identified as primary issues. Few guidelines exist on how to analyze the collected data associated with the usability of digital health technologies. In this study, we aimed to develop a coding framework for the systematic evaluation of users' feedback generated during focus groups and interview sessions with clinicians, underpinned by fundamental usability principles and design components. This codebook also included a coding category to capture the user's clinical role associated with each specific piece of feedback, providing a better understanding of role-specific challenges and perspectives, as well as the level of shared understanding across the multiple clinical roles. Furthermore, a voting system was created to quantitatively inform modifications of the digital system based on usability data. As a use case, we applied this method to an electronic cognitive aid designed to improve coordination and communication in the cardiac operating room, showing that this framework is feasible and useful not only to better understand suboptimal usability aspects, but also to recommend relevant modifications in the design and development of the system from different perspectives, including clinical, technical, and usability teams. The framework described herein may be applied in other highly complex clinical settings, in which digital health systems may play an important role in improving patient care and enhancing patient safety.

Indexed as

Decision support systemDigital healthUsability study

Identifiers

PMID36037053
PMCPMC9413016

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.