ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024
Using think-aloud protocol to identify cognitive events while generating data-driven scientific hypotheses by inexperienced clinical researchers.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 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.
- Development, validation, and usage of metrics to evaluate the quality of clinical research hypotheses.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- A secondary data analysis on hypotheses generated by inexperienced clinical researchers: Cases from a randomized controlled study.Health informatics journalArticle
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We conducted a data-driven hypothesis generation study with clinical researchers using VIADS (a visual interactive analysis tool for filtering and summarizing large data sets coded with hierarchical terminologies) or other analytical tools (as control, e.g., SPSS, SAS, R). The participants analyzed the same datasets and developed hypotheses using a think-aloud verbal protocol. Their screen activities and audio were recorded, transcribed, and coded for cognitive events. We analyzed the recordings to identify the cognitive events (e.g., "Analyze data") during hypothesis generation. The VIADS group exhibited the lowest mean number of cognitive events per hypothesis with the smallest standard deviation. The highest percentages of cognitive events in hypothesis generation were "Using analysis results" (30%) and "Seeking connections" (23%). The results suggest that VIADS may guide participants better than the control group. Our framework for scientific hypothesis generation in clinical research contexts guides the elaboration of the underlying cognitive mechanism of the process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40417518PMC12099392What 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.