MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinician user involvement in the real world: Designing an electronic tool to improve interprofessional communication and collaboration in a hospital setting

2017· article· en· W2770827060 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Informatics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityTrillium Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Medical Association
KeywordsWorkflowAgile software developmentVariety (cybernetics)Participatory designComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Software designHealth careUser-centered designUser interfaceProcess managementSoftware developmentUser experience designEnd userSoftwareKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: User involvement is vital to the success of health information technology implementation. However, involving clinician users effectively and meaningfully in complex healthcare organizations remains challenging. The objective of this paper is to share our real-world experience of applying a variety of user involvement methods in the design and implementation of a clinical communication and collaboration platform aimed at facilitating care of complex hospitalized patients by an interprofessional team of clinicians. METHODS: We designed and implemented an electronic clinical communication and collaboration platform in a large community teaching hospital. The design team consisted of both technical and healthcare professionals. Agile software development methodology was used to facilitate rapid iterative design and user input. We involved clinician users at all stages of the development lifecycle using a variety of user-centered, user co-design, and participatory design methods. RESULTS: Thirty-six software releases were delivered over 24 months. User involvement has resulted in improvement in user interface design, identification of software defects, creation of new modules that facilitated workflow, and identification of necessary changes to the scope of the project early on. CONCLUSION: A variety of user involvement methods were complementary and benefited the design and implementation of a complex health IT solution. Combining these methods with agile software development methodology can turn designs into functioning clinical system to support iterative improvement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.449 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it