Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34220388›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2021

Evaluation is Key: Providing Appropriate Evaluation Measures for Participatory and User-Centred Design Processes of Healthcare IT.

Lorenz Harst, Bastian Wollschlaeger, Jule Birnstein, Tina Fuchs, Patrick Timpel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Lorenz HarstCenter for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, DE.ORCID 0000-0002-6004-2670
Bastian WollschlaegerChair of Technical Information Systems, Technische Universität Dresden, DE.ORCID 0000-0002-1101-0680
Jule BirnsteinZittau/Görlitz University of Applied Sciences, DE.
Tina FuchsChair of Technical Information Systems, Technische Universität Dresden, DE.
Patrick TimpelCenter for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, DE.ORCID 0000-0002-5158-0178

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe increasing availability of healthcare IT has the potential to improve the integration of health services. Existing projects developing healthcare IT mostly disregard the potential and importance of incorporating user feedback and proper evaluation measures to gain user feedback throughout the development process. We therefore provide methodological guidance for evaluation in a stepwise user-centred design process.

methodsBased on a literature review we propose adequate methods for data collection in each phase of participatory and user-centred healthcare IT development. In order to provide an orientation within the plethora of development processes used in practice, we consolidate a generic blueprint process from the literature review. The applicability of our methodological guidance is shown in three diverse use cases from the field of integrated care.

resultsFrom 14 literature items, we identified common evaluation methods including, among others, interviews, focus groups, and surveys. These methods can be associated to six typical development phases that could be derived from research: DISCUSSION: Our methodological guidance has proven applicable for designing healthcare IT solutions from scratch - both for patient and professional settings - and to develop a platform for combining existing component-based solutions. In integrated care settings, where a wide range of stakeholders with multiple needs exist, we thus provide methodological guidance on how to involve users in the development process.

conclusionOur stepwise methodological guidance helps to design and properly evaluate healthcare IT solutions, which meet the user needs and requirements, for integrated care settings.

Indexed as

acceptanceevaluationHealthcare ITimplementationuser-centred design

Identifiers

PMID34220388
PMCPMC8231460

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.