Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37335599›Full record

ReviewJMIR aging2023

Usability and Acceptability of Clinical Dashboards in Aged Care: Systematic Review.

Joyce Siette, Laura Dodds, Fariba Sharifi, Amy Nguyen, Melissa Baysari, Karla Seaman, Magdalena Raban, Nasir Wabe, Johanna Westbrook

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR aging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Creating Interactive Data Dashboards for Evidence Syntheses.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025
    Article
  12. From Data to Decision: Design and Evaluation of a Patient Safety Dashboard.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Joyce SietteThe MARCS Institute for Brain, Behaviour and Development, Western Sydney University, Westmead, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9568-5847
Laura DoddsAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0958-5231
Fariba SharifiAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3030-6594
Amy NguyenAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4603-564X
Melissa BaysariBiomedical Informatics and Digital Health, School of Medical Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1645-9126
Karla SeamanAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4611-9616
Magdalena RabanAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6995-2849
Nasir WabeAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9740-6319
Johanna WestbrookAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1083-8192
Macquarie University · AUWestern Sydney University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of clinical dashboards in aged care systems to support performance review and improve outcomes for older adults receiving care is increasing.

objectiveOur aim was to explore evidence from studies of the acceptability and usability of clinical dashboards including their visual features and functionalities in aged care settings.

methodsA systematic review was conducted using 5 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) from inception to April 2022. Studies were included in the review if they were conducted in aged care environments (home-based community care, retirement villages, and long-term care) and reported a usability or acceptability evaluation of a clinical dashboard for use in aged care environments, including specific dashboard visual features (eg, a qualitative summary of individual user experience or metrics from a usability scale). Two researchers independently reviewed the articles and extracted the data. Data synthesis was performed via narrative review, and the risk of bias was measured using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

resultsIn total, 14 articles reporting on 12 dashboards were included. The quality of the articles varied. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting (home care 8/14, 57%), dashboard user groups (health professionals 9/14, 64%), and sample size (range 3-292). Dashboard features included a visual representation of information (eg, medical condition prevalence), analytic capability (eg, predictive), and others (eg, stakeholder communication). Dashboard usability was mixed (4 dashboards rated as high), and dashboard acceptability was high for 9 dashboards. Most users considered dashboards to be informative, relevant, and functional, highlighting the use and intention of using this resource in the future. Dashboards that had the presence of one or more of these features (bar charts, radio buttons, checkboxes or other symbols, interactive displays, and reporting capabilities) were found to be highly acceptable.

conclusionsA comprehensive summary of clinical dashboards used in aged care is provided to inform future dashboard development, testing, and implementation. Further research is required to optimize visualization features, usability, and acceptability of dashboards in aged care.

Indexed as

acceptabilityaged careclinicaldashboarddatabasedevelopmenthealth information technologyusabilityuser interface designvisualization

Identifiers

PMID37335599
PMCPMC10334718
OpenAlexW4381190371

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.