ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2026
Mixed-Methods User-Centered Design Evaluation of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes System to Enhance Postdischarge Care for Thoracic Surgery Patients.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionHealth information technology (HIT) tools intended to remotely monitor patients' symptoms using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) can improve clinical outcomes; however, successful design requires meeting the unique needs of complex end user groups. Therefore, we applied a user-centered design approach to iteratively evaluate and inform improvements to an ePRO system designed for postdischarge thoracic surgery care, incorporating perspectives of patient, caregiver, and provider end users.
methodsWe purposively recruited a targeted sample of thoracic surgery patients, their caregivers, and providers to participate in field observations and semi-structured interviews; patients additionally completed the System Usability Scale and Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire to assess usability. The research team synthesized data through iterative modeling, which was subsequently validated through a mixed end user focus group. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis guided by the Systems Approach to Health Care Delivery and Lean Six Sigma 6 Ms frameworks.
resultsA total of 16 end users participated, including patients (n = 4), caregivers (n = 2), and 10 providers representing distinct segmented user groups of nurses (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 6). Emergent themes centered on user expectations, personalization, relationships, communication, and accessibility. Participants also highlighted the survey's brevity, responsiveness of the care team, opportunities to strengthen patient and provider training, the need for clearer communication regarding ePRO use, and preferences for more contextualized alerts. Findings informed specific recommendations for system optimization.
conclusionsThe user-centered design approach generated rich insights into end user experiences, expectations, and interactions with the ePRO system. Future design efforts should focus on improvements that better support the diverse needs, workflows, and contexts of complex end users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.