Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38774123›Full record

ArticleHuman factors in healthcare2023

Retrospective analysis of the human-centered design process used to develop a clinical decision support in the emergency department: PE Dx Study Part 2.

Megan E Salwei, Peter L T Hoonakker, Michael Pulia, Douglas Wiegmann, Brian W Patterson, Pascale Carayon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human factors in healthcare, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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.

Megan E SalweiCenter for Research and Innovation in Systems Safety, Department of Anesthesiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Peter L T HoonakkerWisconsin Institute for Healthcare Systems Engineering, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Michael PuliaWisconsin Institute for Healthcare Systems Engineering, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Douglas WiegmannWisconsin Institute for Healthcare Systems Engineering, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Brian W PattersonWisconsin Institute for Healthcare Systems Engineering, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Pascale CarayonWisconsin Institute for Healthcare Systems Engineering, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
AHRQ HHS K01 HS029042AHRQ HHS K08 HS024558AHRQ HHS K12 HS026395AHRQ HHS R01 HS022086NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the growing implementation and use of health IT such as Clinical Decision Support (CDS), there is increasing attention on the potential negative impact of these technologies on patients (e.g., medication errors) and clinicians (e.g., increased workload, decreased job satisfaction, burnout). Human-Centered Design (HCD) and Human Factors (HF) principles are recommended to improve the usability of health IT and reduce its negative impact on patients and clinicians; however, challenges persist. The objective of this study is to understand how an HCD process influences the usability of health IT. We conducted a systematic retrospective analysis of the HCD process used in the design of a CDS for pulmonary embolism diagnosis in the emergency department (ED). Guided by the usability outcomes (e.g., barriers and facilitators) of the CDS use "in the wild" (see Part 1 of this research in the accompanying manuscript), we performed deductive content analysis of 17 documents (e.g., design session transcripts) produced during the HCD process. We describe if and how the design team considered the barriers and facilitators during the HCD process. We identified 7 design outcomes of the HCD process, for instance designing a workaround and making a design change to the CDS. We identify gaps in the current HCD process and demonstrate the need for a continuous health IT design process.

Indexed as

Clinical decision supportHealth ITHuman-centered designRetrospective analysisUsability evaluation

Identifiers

PMID38774123
PMCPMC11104061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.