Nurse involvement in health information technology design for digital nursing practice: a scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract There is growing demand for user involvement in health information technology (IT) design to ensure that emerging technologies meet the needs and expectations of end users. This scoping review explored the state of nurses’ involvement in health IT design, focusing on the: (1) methods, frequency, capacity, and levels of involvement in the design process; (2) types of health IT systems nurses are included in designing; and (3) outcomes of nurses’ inclusion in the design process. This review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in seven databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Applied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBCOhost), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, Compendex Engineering Village and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Xplore Digital Library database platforms. A total of 3,364 studies were screened at the title/abstract phase. After initial exclusions, 632 articles were screened for full texts, 495 were excluded, resulting in a final set of 137 eligible articles. Included studies most frequently involved nurses as users or testers of the technologies – usually at the end stages of the design process. Most studies interchangeably used the concepts of human-centred design and user-centred design to guide the design process. Interviews, surveys, observations and think-aloud techniques were the most frequently used design methods to elicit nurses’ perspectives about health IT systems. However, it was unclear which methods or approaches were most effective in engaging nurses in the design process. No standardized or validated nurse engagement frameworks were reported. These findings highlight the need to explore the nature of nurses’ involvement in design, their preferences in engagement and specific contributions and roles in order to develop an evidence-based approach to guide nurses’ participation in the design process. Author summary Nurses are rarely involved in health IT design, particularly in the early design stages. Failure to involve nurses in early stages can lead to IT systems lacking specific nursing contents, functionalities, and technical features, which may affect the use of the systems for nursing work. In this study, we found evidence of nurses being included at the end stages of the design process. Despite majority of the studies focusing on health IT design and development, nurses were mainly involved as users or testers of the technologies. In other words, nurses were mainly engaged in usability testing activities, which typically occur at the end of the design process rather than upstream design phases. We found that the concepts of human-centred design and user-centred design used interchangeably. At the end of the design processes, nurses perceived the IT systems as acceptable and usable, and either integrated or willing to integrate into clinical practice. Nurses perceived satisfaction with the design process resulting from effective technologies highlight the importance of engaging them in every stage of the design process. Our findings suggest that nurses have potential to leverage their clinical expertise and practical understanding of nursing workflows to guide health care technology design processes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,046 | 0,137 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,015 | 0,015 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».