ArticleJMIR human factors2024
User Perceptions of Visual Clot in a High-Fidelity Simulation Study: Mixed Qualitative-Quantitative Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anaesthesia professionals' perspectives on ECG interpretation and arrhythmia situation awareness with Visual Patient Heart: a qualitative multicentre study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Generative AI in simulation debriefings: an exploratory study using the Team-FIRST framework and qualitative feedback from simulation experts and learners.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundViscoelastic hemostatic assays, such as rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) or thromboelastography, enable prompt diagnosis and accelerate targeted treatment. However, the complex interpretation of the results remains challenging. Visual Clot-a situation awareness-based visualization technology-was developed to assist clinicians in interpreting viscoelastic tests.
objectiveFollowing a previous high-fidelity simulation study, we analyzed users' perceptions of the technology, to identify its strengths and limitations from clinicians' perspectives.
methodsThis is a mixed qualitative-quantitative study consisting of interviews and a survey. After solving coagulation scenarios using Visual Clot in high-fidelity simulations, we interviewed anesthesia personnel about the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the new tool. We used a template approach to identify dominant themes in interview responses. From these themes, we defined 5 statements, which were then rated on Likert scales in a questionnaire.
resultsWe interviewed 77 participants and 23 completed the survey. We identified 9 frequently mentioned topics by analyzing the interview responses. The most common themes were "positive design features," "intuitive and easy to learn," and "lack of a quantitative component." In the survey, 21 respondents agreed that Visual Clot is easy to learn and 16 respondents stated that a combination of Visual Clot and ROTEM would help them manage complex hemostatic situations.
conclusionsA group of anesthesia care providers found Visual Clot well-designed, intuitive, and easy to learn. Participants highlighted its usefulness in emergencies, especially for clinicians inexperienced in coagulation management. However, the lack of quantitative information is an area for improvement.
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.