Evaluating visual analytics for health informatics applications: a systematic review from the American Medical Informatics Association Visual Analytics Working Group Task Force on Evaluation

Author:

Wu Danny T Y1,Chen Annie T2,Manning John D3ORCID,Levy-Fix Gal4,Backonja Uba25,Borland David6,Caban Jesus J7,Dowding Dawn W8ORCID,Hochheiser Harry9ORCID,Kagan Vadim10,Kandaswamy Swaminathan11,Kumar Manish1213ORCID,Nunez Alexis,Pan Eric14ORCID,Gotz David1315

Affiliation:

1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

2. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA

3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Atrium Health's Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA

5. Nursing & Healthcare Leadership, University of Washington Tacoma, Tacoma, Washington

6. Renaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

7. National Intrepid Center of Excellence, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA

8. Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

9. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Intelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

10. SentiMetrix, Inc, Bethesda, Maryland, USA

11. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA

12. MEASURE Evaluation, Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

13. Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

14. Healthcare Delivery Research and Evaluation, Westat, Rockville, Maryland, USA

15. School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThis article reports results from a systematic literature review related to the evaluation of data visualizations and visual analytics technologies within the health informatics domain. The review aims to (1) characterize the variety of evaluation methods used within the health informatics community and (2) identify best practices.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed searches were conducted in February 2017 using search terms representing key concepts of interest: health care settings, visualization, and evaluation. References were also screened for eligibility. Data were extracted from included studies and analyzed using a PICOS framework: Participants, Interventions, Comparators, Outcomes, and Study Design.ResultsAfter screening, 76 publications met the review criteria. Publications varied across all PICOS dimensions. The most common audience was healthcare providers (n = 43), and the most common data gathering methods were direct observation (n = 30) and surveys (n = 27). About half of the publications focused on static, concentrated views of data with visuals (n = 36). Evaluations were heterogeneous regarding setting and measurements used.DiscussionWhen evaluating data visualizations and visual analytics technologies, a variety of approaches have been used. Usability measures were used most often in early (prototype) implementations, whereas clinical outcomes were most common in evaluations of operationally-deployed systems. These findings suggest opportunities for both (1) expanding evaluation practices, and (2) innovation with respect to evaluation methods for data visualizations and visual analytics technologies across health settings.ConclusionEvaluation approaches are varied. New studies should adopt commonly reported metrics, context-appropriate study designs, and phased evaluation strategies.

Funder

American Medical Informatics Association

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Health Informatics

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3