Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38117545›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Holistic Human-Serving Digitization of Health Care Needs Integrated Automated System-Level Assessment Tools.

Cindy Welzel, Fabienne Cotte, Magdalena Wekenborg, Baptiste Vasey, Peter McCulloch, Stephen Gilbert

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
10.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Cindy Welzel *Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5710-1975
Fabienne Cotte *Ada Health GmbH, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2898-422X
Magdalena WekenborgElse Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4498-107X
Baptiste VaseyNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0017-8891
Peter McCullochNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3210-8273
Stephen GilbertElse Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1997-1689
Fresenius (Germany) · DEUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital health tools, platforms, and artificial intelligence- or machine learning-based clinical decision support systems are increasingly part of health delivery approaches, with an ever-greater degree of system interaction. Critical to the successful deployment of these tools is their functional integration into existing clinical routines and workflows. This depends on system interoperability and on intuitive and safe user interface design. The importance of minimizing emergent workflow stress through human factors research and purposeful design for integration cannot be overstated. Usability of tools in practice is as important as algorithm quality. Regulatory and health technology assessment frameworks recognize the importance of these factors to a certain extent, but their focus remains mainly on the individual product rather than on emergent system and workflow effects. The measurement of performance and user experience has so far been performed in ad hoc, nonstandardized ways by individual actors using their own evaluation approaches. We propose that a standard framework for system-level and holistic evaluation could be built into interacting digital systems to enable systematic and standardized system-wide, multiproduct, postmarket surveillance and technology assessment. Such a system could be made available to developers through regulatory or assessment bodies as an application programming interface and could be a requirement for digital tool certification, just as interoperability is. This would enable health systems and tool developers to collect system-level data directly from real device use cases, enabling the controlled and safe delivery of systematic quality assessment or improvement studies suitable for the complexity and interconnectedness of clinical workflows using developing digital health technologies.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision Support Systems, ClinicalAlgorithmsDigital HealthHumansMachine Learningdigital health toolshealth carehealth technology assessmenthuman factorspostmarket surveillancequality assessmentquality improvementregulatory frameworksoftware as a medical deviceuser experience

Identifiers

PMID38117545
PMCPMC10765286
OpenAlexW4389992604

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.