Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40890785›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Using human centred design and human factors to support a rapid health information technology patient safety response.

Selvana Awad, Rachel Begg, Thomas Loveday, Melissa T Baysari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Selvana AwadThe University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. sawa9744@uni.sydney.edu.au.
Rachel BeggeHealth NSW, Sydney, Australia.
Thomas LovedayeHealth NSW, Sydney, Australia.
Melissa T BaysariThe University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman centred design (HCD) and human factors (HF) approaches can support the safe design and redesign of Health Information Technologies (HITs). Safety issues associated with HITs can occur due to complex sociotechnical and contextual factors which dynamically impact safety. An effective rapid HIT patient safety response could resolve issues before patient harm occurs.

aimTo describe, evaluate, and generate recommendations for optimising the application of HCD and HF methods by non-HF experts during a rapid statewide HIT patient safety response.

methodsIn response to reported safety issues with a HIT, HCD and HF approaches were used by non-HF experts during site visits to understand the issues, contextual differences between sites and gather preliminary feedback on proposed redesign options to mitigate the issues. This quality improvement study involved two 45-minute focus groups with 7 staff who conducted the site visits to understand what worked well, what did not work well, and any lessons learnt relating to the application of HCD and HF informed data collection approaches during this patient safety response.

resultsOutcomes from the site visits were reported to be variable. However, the overall data collection approach was considered effective in gathering useful information. Participants explained that key outcomes of the approach used included improved understanding of the issues and contributing contextual factors, effective engagement with sites and users, and increased team collaboration and job satisfaction among the data collection team. Participants identified factors that influenced the effectiveness of site visits including data collection approaches (e.g., individual vs group data collection), the circumstances on the day (e.g., time and availability of frontline staff), contextual factors (e.g., the nature of the unit/setting) and factors related to the data collection team (e.g., selection of team members involved). Recommendations have been provided to optimise future rapid HIT patient safety responses.

conclusionData collection approaches informed by HCD and HF methods are useful for understanding and addressing HIT safety concerns requiring rapid responses, even when applied by non-HF experts. Ideally, methods should be applied flexibly and involve seeking insights from frontline users in their own environments.

Indexed as

ErgonomicsMedical InformaticsPatient SafetyUser-Centered DesignFocus GroupsHumansQuality ImprovementHealth information technologyHuman factorsPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID40890785
PMCPMC12403536

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.