ArticleDigital health
A pragmatic methodical framework for the user-centred development of an electronic process support for the sleep laboratory patients' management.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Limited capacities and ineffective care pathways result in long waiting times for patients and sporadic treatment controls in sleep medicine. As one objective of the 'Telesleep Medicine' project, a portal should be developed, which supports sleep specialists in an efficient and resource-saving patient management. On account of the limited project timeframe, the 'classical' user-centred design and evaluation methods could not be comprehensively implemented. Therefore, a pragmatic methodical framework was developed. Methods: For the iterative development of the portal, a combination of low-cost and quick-to-implement methods was used. In chronological order, these were: context interviews, personas, the development of an as-is model, a web search of design standards and good design aspects of similar systems, the development of a to-be model, the creation of an overarching mind map, and the iterative creation of mockups with simplified usability walkthroughs. Results: The feasibility of the pragmatic methodological framework for the development of a prototype for the portal was demonstrated. The used method combination resulted in a prototype based on the needs and requirements of the sleep specialists, taking into account their specific workflow and the technical implementation conditions. Conclusions: The presented pragmatic methodological framework can be a valuable resource for developers of comparable projects. The combination of methods worked well together regarding the limited timeframe and resources for concept development. For the future, we plan to implement and test the portal in the clinical field and thus enrich our framework with additional methods.
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.