ArticleJMIR human factors2023
A Visual Analytic Tool (VIADS) to Assist the Hypothesis Generation Process in Clinical Research: Mixed Methods Usability Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development, validation, and usage of metrics to evaluate the quality of clinical research hypotheses.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Data-Driven Hypothesis Generation in Clinical Research: What We Learned from a Human Subject Study?Medical research archives · 2024Article
- Using think-aloud protocol to identify cognitive events while generating data-driven scientific hypotheses by inexperienced clinical researchers.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Data-driven hypothesis generation among inexperienced clinical researchers: A comparison of secondary data analyses with visualization (VIADS) and other tools.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Data-driven hypothesis generation among inexperienced clinical researchers: A comparison of secondary data analyses with visualization (VIADS) and other tools.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- How do clinical researchers generate data-driven scientific hypotheses? Cognitive events using think-aloud protocol.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- A secondary data analysis on hypotheses generated by inexperienced clinical researchers: Cases from a randomized controlled study.Health informatics journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVisualization can be a powerful tool to comprehend data sets, especially when they can be represented via hierarchical structures. Enhanced comprehension can facilitate the development of scientific hypotheses. However, the inclusion of excessive data can make visualizations overwhelming.
objectiveWe developed a visual interactive analytic tool for filtering and summarizing large health data sets coded with hierarchical terminologies (VIADS). In this study, we evaluated the usability of VIADS for visualizing data sets of patient diagnoses and procedures coded in the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM).
methodsWe used mixed methods in the study. A group of 12 clinical researchers participated in the generation of data-driven hypotheses using the same data sets and time frame (a 1-hour training session and a 2-hour study session) utilizing VIADS via the think-aloud protocol. The audio and screen activities were recorded remotely. A modified version of the System Usability Scale (SUS) survey and a brief survey with open-ended questions were administered after the study to assess the usability of VIADS and verify their intense usage experience with VIADS.
resultsThe range of SUS scores was 37.5 to 87.5. The mean SUS score for VIADS was 71.88 (out of a possible 100, SD 14.62), and the median SUS was 75. The participants unanimously agreed that VIADS offers new perspectives on data sets (12/12, 100%), while 75% (8/12) agreed that VIADS facilitates understanding, presentation, and interpretation of underlying data sets. The comments on the utility of VIADS were positive and aligned well with the design objectives of VIADS. The answers to the open-ended questions in the modified SUS provided specific suggestions regarding potential improvements for VIADS, and the identified problems with usability were used to update the tool.
conclusionsThis usability study demonstrates that VIADS is a usable tool for analyzing secondary data sets with good average usability, good SUS score, and favorable utility. Currently, VIADS accepts data sets with hierarchical codes and their corresponding frequencies. Consequently, only specific types of use cases are supported by the analytical results. Participants agreed, however, that VIADS provides new perspectives on data sets and is relatively easy to use. The VIADS functionalities most appreciated by participants were the ability to filter, summarize, compare, and visualize data. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/39414.
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.