Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36279164›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Visualization Techniques of Time-Oriented Data for the Comparison of Single Patients With Multiple Patients or Cohorts: Scoping Review.

Jan Scheer, Alisa Volkert, Nicolas Brich, Lina Weinert, Nandhini Santhanam, Michael Krone, Thomas Ganslandt, Martin Boeker, Till Nagel

Abstract readScoping Review
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Designing interactive visualizations for analyzing chronic lung diseases in a user-centered approach.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Jan ScheerHuman Data Interaction Lab, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0480-1361
Alisa VolkertCenter for Innovative Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6612-5824
Nicolas BrichBig Data Visual Analytics in Life Sciences, Institute for Bioinformatics and Medical Informatics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3175-0464
Lina WeinertInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2733-1267
Nandhini SanthanamAbteilung für Biomedizinische Informatik, Zentrum für Präventivmedizin und Digitale Gesundheit Baden-Württemberg, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim der Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9979-0908
Michael KroneBig Data Visual Analytics in Life Sciences, Institute for Bioinformatics and Medical Informatics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1445-7568
Thomas GanslandtChair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6864-8936
Martin BoekerUniversity Hospital Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2972-2042
Till NagelHuman Data Interaction Lab, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5400-091X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVisual analysis and data delivery in the form of visualizations are of great importance in health care, as such forms of presentation can reduce errors and improve care and can also help provide new insights into long-term disease progression. Information visualization and visual analytics also address the complexity of long-term, time-oriented patient data by reducing inherent complexity and facilitating a focus on underlying and hidden patterns.

objectiveThis review aims to provide an overview of visualization techniques for time-oriented data in health care, supporting the comparison of patients. We systematically collected literature and report on the visualization techniques supporting the comparison of time-based data sets of single patients with those of multiple patients or their cohorts and summarized the use of these techniques.

methodsThis scoping review used the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. After all collected articles were screened by 16 reviewers according to the criteria, 6 reviewers extracted the set of variables under investigation. The characteristics of these variables were based on existing taxonomies or identified through open coding.

resultsOf the 249 screened articles, we identified 22 (8.8%) that fit all criteria and reviewed them in depth. We collected and synthesized findings from these articles for medical aspects such as medical context, medical objective, and medical data type, as well as for the core investigated aspects of visualization techniques, interaction techniques, and supported tasks. The extracted articles were published between 2003 and 2019 and were mostly situated in clinical research. These systems used a wide range of visualization techniques, most frequently showing changes over time. Timelines and temporal line charts occurred 8 times each, followed by histograms with 7 occurrences and scatterplots with 5 occurrences. We report on the findings quantitatively through visual summarization, as well as qualitatively.

conclusionsThe articles under review in general mitigated complexity through visualization and supported diverse medical objectives. We identified 3 distinct patient entities: single patients, multiple patients, and cohorts. Cohorts were typically visualized in condensed form, either through prior data aggregation or through visual summarization, whereas visualization of individual patients often contained finer details. All the systems provided mechanisms for viewing and comparing patient data. However, explicitly comparing a single patient with multiple patients or a cohort was supported only by a few systems. These systems mainly use basic visualization techniques, with some using novel visualizations tailored to a specific task. Overall, we found the visual comparison of measurements between single and multiple patients or cohorts to be underdeveloped, and we argue for further research in a systematic review, as well as the usefulness of a design space.

Indexed as

ChecklistDelivery of Health CareHumansPublicationscohortscomparisoninformation visualizationmultiple patientspatient datasingle patientstime-oriented datavisual analyticsvisualization systems

Identifiers

PMID36279164
PMCPMC9641521

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.