Suppr超能文献

回顾性与并发出声思维法在医生数据查询工具形成性可用性测试中的价值

The value of Retrospective and Concurrent Think Aloud in formative usability testing of a physician data query tool.

作者信息

Peute Linda W P, de Keizer Nicolette F, Jaspers Monique W M

机构信息

Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, The Netherlands; Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Center for Human Factors Engineering of Health Information Technology (HIT-Lab), The Netherlands.

Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Biomed Inform. 2015 Jun;55:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.02.006. Epub 2015 Feb 27.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of the Concurrent (CTA) and Retrospective (RTA) Think Aloud method and to assess their value in a formative usability evaluation of an Intensive Care Registry-physician data query tool designed to support ICU quality improvement processes.

METHODS

Sixteen representative intensive care physicians participated in the usability evaluation study. Subjects were allocated to either the CTA or RTA method by a matched randomized design. Each subject performed six usability-testing tasks of varying complexity in the query tool in a real-working context. Methods were compared with regard to number and type of problems detected. Verbal protocols of CTA and RTA were analyzed in depth to assess differences in verbal output. Standardized measures were applied to assess thoroughness in usability problem detection weighted per problem severity level and method overall effectiveness in detecting usability problems with regard to the time subjects spent per method.

RESULTS

The usability evaluation of the data query tool revealed a total of 43 unique usability problems that the intensive care physicians encountered. CTA detected unique usability problems with regard to graphics/symbols, navigation issues, error messages, and the organization of information on the query tool's screens. RTA detected unique issues concerning system match with subjects' language and applied terminology. The in-depth verbal protocol analysis of CTA provided information on intensive care physicians' query design strategies. Overall, CTA performed significantly better than RTA in detecting usability problems. CTA usability problem detection effectiveness was 0.80 vs. 0.62 (p<0.05) respectively, with an average difference of 42% less time spent per subject compared to RTA. In addition, CTA was more thorough in detecting usability problems of a moderate (0.85 vs. 0.7) and severe nature (0.71 vs. 0.57).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the CTA is more effective in usability-problem detection and provided clarification of intensive care physician query design strategies to inform redesign of the query tool. However, CTA does not outperform RTA. The RTA additionally elucidated unique usability problems and new user requirements. Based on the results of this study, we recommend the use of CTA in formative usability evaluation studies of health information technology. However, we recommend further research on the application of RTA in usability studies with regard to user expertise and experience when focusing on user profile customized (re)design.

摘要

目的

比较并发式(CTA)和回顾式(RTA)出声思维法的性能,并评估它们在重症监护登记处医师数据查询工具的形成性可用性评估中的价值,该工具旨在支持重症监护病房(ICU)的质量改进流程。

方法

16名具有代表性的重症监护医师参与了可用性评估研究。通过匹配随机设计将受试者分配到CTA或RTA方法组。每个受试者在实际工作环境中对查询工具执行六项不同复杂程度的可用性测试任务。比较两种方法在检测到的问题数量和类型方面的差异。对CTA和RTA的口头协议进行深入分析,以评估口头输出的差异。应用标准化措施来评估按问题严重程度加权的可用性问题检测的彻底性,以及就受试者在每种方法上花费的时间而言,方法在检测可用性问题方面的总体有效性。

结果

数据查询工具的可用性评估共发现重症监护医师遇到的43个独特的可用性问题。CTA检测到与图形/符号、导航问题、错误消息以及查询工具屏幕上的信息组织有关的独特可用性问题。RTA检测到与系统与受试者语言和应用术语的匹配有关的独特问题。对CTA的深入口头协议分析提供了有关重症监护医师查询设计策略的信息。总体而言,CTA在检测可用性问题方面的表现明显优于RTA。CTA的可用性问题检测有效性分别为0.80和0.62(p<0.05),与RTA相比,每个受试者平均花费的时间少42%。此外,CTA在检测中度(0.85对0.7)和严重程度(0.71对0.57)的可用性问题方面更加彻底。

结论

在本研究中,CTA在可用性问题检测方面更有效,并为重症监护医师查询设计策略提供了清晰说明,以指导查询工具的重新设计。然而,CTA并不优于RTA。RTA还阐明了独特的可用性问题和新的用户需求。基于本研究结果,我们建议在健康信息技术的形成性可用性评估研究中使用CTA。然而,我们建议在关注用户概况定制(重新)设计时,进一步研究RTA在可用性研究中关于用户专业知识和经验的应用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验