Verbal Protocols for Assessing the Usability of Clinical Decision Support: The Retrospective Sense Making Protocol

被引：4

作者：

Balatsoukas, Panagiotis ^{[1
]}

Ainsworth, John ^{[2
]}

Williams, Richard ^{[2
]}

Carruthers, Emma ^{[2
]}

Davies, Colin ^{[2
]}

McGrath, James ^{[2
]}

Akbarov, Artur ^{[2
]}

Soiland-Reyes, Claudia ^{[2
]}

Badiyani, Saurin ^{[2
]}

Buchan, Lain ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Manchester, Ctr Hlth Informat, Inst Populat Hlth, 1-308 J McFarlane Bldg,Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9PL, Lancs, England

[2] Univ Manchester, Manchester Acad Hlth Sci, Inst Populat Hlth, Ctr Hlth Informat, Manchester M13 9PL, Lancs, England

来源：

MEDINFO 2013: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 14TH WORLD CONGRESS ON MEDICAL AND HEALTH INFORMATICS, PTS 1 AND 2 | 2013年 / 192卷

关键词：

Decision support; Usability; Evaluation Protocol; CONCURRENT;

D O I：

10.3233/978-1-61499-289-9-283

中图分类号：

R19 [保健组织与事业（卫生事业管理）];

学科分类号：

摘要：

We compare the effectiveness of two types of verbal protocol, concurrent think aloud vs. retrospective sense making, for evaluating the usability of a clinical decision support tool. Thirty-five medical and nursing students participated in a usability experiment. Participants were asked to complete seven tasks using the system under evaluation. Eighteen students were allocated to the concurrent think aloud group and the remainder followed the retrospective protocol. The retrospective protocol was significantly more sensitive than the concurrent protocol in recording unique usability problems related to users' cognitive behaviour. These problems concerned the interpretation and comprehension of statistical output, search results and system messages. These findings can be explained by the retrospective protocol's greater ability to detect compound usability problems, capturing the cognitive dimensions of users' interactions with the interface in greater depth. Evaluations of clinical decision support systems should take an evidence-based approach to selecting protocols.

引用

页码：283 / 287

页数：5

共 15 条

[1]

[Anonymous], 1993, PROTOCOL ANAL

[2] A usability evaluation of a SNOMED CT based compositional interface terminology for intensive care [J].

Bakhshi-Raiez, F. ;

de Keizer, N. F. ;

Cornet, R. ;

Dorrepaal, M. ;

Dongelmans, D. ;

Jaspers, M. W. M. .

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2012, 81 (05) :351-362

[3] Example of a Human Factors Engineering approach to a medication administration work system: Potential impact on patient safety [J].

Beuscart-Zephir, Marie-Catherine ;

Pelayo, Sylvia ;

Bernonville, Stephanie .

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2010, 79 (04) :E43-E57

[4] Involving users in the design and usability evaluation of a clinical decision support system [J].

Carroll, C ;

Marsden, P ;

Soden, P ;

Naylor, E ;

New, J ;

Dornan, T .

COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, 2002, 69 (02) :123-135

[5]

Choi B, 2005, P AMIA, P921

[6]

Dervin Brenda., 1999, CHAOS ORDER SENSE MA, P35

[7] Measuring spontaneous and instructed evaluation processes during Web search: Integrating concurrent thinking-aloud protocols and eye-tracking data [J].

Gerjets, Peter ;

Kammerer, Yvonne ;

Werner, Benita .

LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION, 2011, 21 (02) :220-231

[8] Complementary methods of system usability evaluation: Surveys and observations during software design and development cycles [J].

Horsky, Jan ;

Mc Colgan, Kerry ;

Pang, Justine E. ;

Melnikas, Andrea J. ;

Linder, Jeffrey A. ;

Schnipper, Jeffrey L. ;

Middleton, Blackford .

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2010, 43 (05) :782-790

[9]

Jensen JJ, 2007, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V4550, P508

[10]

Lai Tsai-Ya, 2007, Int J Med Inform, V76 Suppl 2, pS317, DOI 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.05.007

← 1 2 →