Evaluating Simplified Web Interfaces of Risk Models for Clinical Use: Pilot Survey Study.
electronic records
risk model
technology acceptance
user interface
Journal
JMIR formative research
ISSN: 2561-326X
Titre abrégé: JMIR Form Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101726394
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Jul 2021
16 Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
03
07
2020
accepted:
31
05
2021
revised:
14
02
2021
entrez:
16
7
2021
pubmed:
17
7
2021
medline:
17
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In this pilot study, we investigated sociotechnical factors that affect intention to use a simplified web model to support clinical decision making. We investigated factors that are known to affect technology adoption using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2) model. The goal was to pilot and test a tool to better support complex clinical assessments. Based on the results of a previously published work, we developed a web-based mobile user interface, WebModel, to allow users to work with regression equations and their predictions to evaluate the impact of various characteristics or treatments on key outcomes (eg, survival time) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The WebModel provides a way to combat information overload and more easily compare treatment options. It limits the number of web forms presented to a user to between 1 and 20, rather than the dozens of detailed calculations typically required. The WebModel uses responsive design and can be used on multiple devices. To test the WebModel, we designed a questionnaire to probe the efficacy of the WebModel and assess the usability and usefulness of the system. The study was live for one month, and participants had access to it over that time. The questionnaire was administered online, and data from 674 clinical users who had access to the WebModel were captured. SPSS and R were used for statistical analysis. The regression model developed from UTAUT2 constructs was a fit. Specifically, five of the seven factors were significant positive coefficients in the regression: performance expectancy (β=.2730; t=7.994; P<.001), effort expectancy (β=.1473; t=3.870; P=.001), facilitating conditions (β=.1644; t=3.849; P<.001), hedonic motivation (β=.2321; t=3.991; P<.001), and habit (β=.2943; t=12.732). Social influence was not a significant factor, while price value had a significant negative influence on intention to use the WebModel. Our results indicate that multiple influences impact positive response to the system, many of which relate to the efficiency of the interface to provide clear information. Although we found that the price value was a negative factor, it is possible this was due to the removal of health workers from purchasing decisions. Given that this was a pilot test, and that the system was not used in a clinical setting, we could not examine factors related to actual workflow, patient safety, or social influence. This study shows that the concept of a simplified WebModel could be effective and efficient in reducing information overload in complex clinical decision making. We recommend further study to test this in a clinical setting and gather qualitative data from users regarding the value of the tool in practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In this pilot study, we investigated sociotechnical factors that affect intention to use a simplified web model to support clinical decision making.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
We investigated factors that are known to affect technology adoption using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2) model. The goal was to pilot and test a tool to better support complex clinical assessments.
METHODS
METHODS
Based on the results of a previously published work, we developed a web-based mobile user interface, WebModel, to allow users to work with regression equations and their predictions to evaluate the impact of various characteristics or treatments on key outcomes (eg, survival time) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The WebModel provides a way to combat information overload and more easily compare treatment options. It limits the number of web forms presented to a user to between 1 and 20, rather than the dozens of detailed calculations typically required. The WebModel uses responsive design and can be used on multiple devices. To test the WebModel, we designed a questionnaire to probe the efficacy of the WebModel and assess the usability and usefulness of the system. The study was live for one month, and participants had access to it over that time. The questionnaire was administered online, and data from 674 clinical users who had access to the WebModel were captured. SPSS and R were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The regression model developed from UTAUT2 constructs was a fit. Specifically, five of the seven factors were significant positive coefficients in the regression: performance expectancy (β=.2730; t=7.994; P<.001), effort expectancy (β=.1473; t=3.870; P=.001), facilitating conditions (β=.1644; t=3.849; P<.001), hedonic motivation (β=.2321; t=3.991; P<.001), and habit (β=.2943; t=12.732). Social influence was not a significant factor, while price value had a significant negative influence on intention to use the WebModel.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results indicate that multiple influences impact positive response to the system, many of which relate to the efficiency of the interface to provide clear information. Although we found that the price value was a negative factor, it is possible this was due to the removal of health workers from purchasing decisions. Given that this was a pilot test, and that the system was not used in a clinical setting, we could not examine factors related to actual workflow, patient safety, or social influence. This study shows that the concept of a simplified WebModel could be effective and efficient in reducing information overload in complex clinical decision making. We recommend further study to test this in a clinical setting and gather qualitative data from users regarding the value of the tool in practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34269692
pii: v5i7e22110
doi: 10.2196/22110
pmc: PMC8325085
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e22110Informations de copyright
©Louis Beaubien, Colin Conrad, Janet Music, Sandra Toze. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 16.07.2021.
Références
Inform Health Soc Care. 2017 Mar;42(2):135-152
pubmed: 26890621
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Feb;21(e1):e28-34
pubmed: 24052536
Clin Biochem Rev. 2014 Feb;35(1):37-61
pubmed: 24659835
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007 Oct 11;:26-30
pubmed: 18693791
Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):397-403
pubmed: 28292484
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jun 10;7(6):e13950
pubmed: 31199330
Comput Inform Nurs. 2018 Dec;36(12):579-588
pubmed: 30134256
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Apr 22;173(8):702-4
pubmed: 23460235
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jan;24(1):123-129
pubmed: 27274016
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2016 Aug 01;9:335-44
pubmed: 27536128
Healthc (Amst). 2018 Mar;6(1):7-12
pubmed: 28716376
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Jun 30;8(6):e18781
pubmed: 32602847
Appl Clin Inform. 2010 Apr 28;1(2):116-31
pubmed: 23616831
Med Decis Making. 2017 May;37(4):469-480
pubmed: 27317436
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Dec;36(12):1453-1462
pubmed: 30117116
Int J Nurs Stud. 2019 Jun;94:74-84
pubmed: 30939418
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Mar;8(3):243-244
pubmed: 32135094
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 May 03;7(5):e13555
pubmed: 31066710
Hum Factors. 2015 Aug;57(5):805-34
pubmed: 25850118