School of Nursing, Columbia University, New York City, New York USA.
Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York City, New York USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Feb 1;26(2):162-171. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy152.
To systematically synthesize the literature on information visualizations of symptoms included as National Institute of Nursing Research common data elements and designed for use by patients and/or healthcare providers.
We searched CINAHL, Engineering Village, PsycINFO, PubMed, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Explore Digital Library to identify peer-reviewed studies published between 2007 and 2017. We evaluated the studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and a visualization quality score, and organized evaluation findings according to the Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Model.
Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria. Ten of these addressed all MMAT items; 13 addressed all visualization quality items. Symptom visualizations focused on pain, fatigue, and sleep and were represented as graphs (n = 14), icons (n = 4), and virtual body maps (n = 2). Studies evaluated perceived ease of use (n = 13), perceived usefulness (n = 12), efficiency (n = 9), effectiveness (n = 5), preference (n = 6), and intent to use (n = 3). Few studies reported race/ethnicity or education level.
The small number of studies for each type of information visualization limit generalizable conclusions about optimal visualization approaches. User-centered participatory approaches for information visualization design and more sophisticated evaluation designs are needed to assess which visualization elements work best for which populations in which contexts.
系统综合纳入国家护理研究所共同数据元素并为患者和/或医疗保健提供者设计的症状信息可视化文献。
我们在 CINAHL、Engineering Village、PsycINFO、PubMed、ACM 数字图书馆和 IEEE Explore 数字图书馆中搜索了 2007 年至 2017 年期间发表的同行评审研究。我们使用混合方法评估工具(MMAT)和可视化质量评分来评估研究,并根据健康信息技术可用性评估模型组织评估结果。
有 18 项研究符合纳入标准。其中 10 项研究涵盖了所有 MMAT 项目;13 项研究涵盖了所有可视化质量项目。症状可视化主要集中在疼痛、疲劳和睡眠方面,表现为图表(n=14)、图标(n=4)和虚拟身体地图(n=2)。研究评估了感知易用性(n=13)、感知有用性(n=12)、效率(n=9)、有效性(n=5)、偏好(n=6)和使用意图(n=3)。很少有研究报告种族/民族或教育水平。
每种信息可视化类型的研究数量较少,限制了对最佳可视化方法的可推广结论。需要采用以用户为中心的参与式方法进行信息可视化设计和更复杂的评估设计,以评估哪些可视化元素在哪些情况下最适合哪些人群。