Formative evaluation of a patient-specific clinical knowledge summarization tool.

Del Fiol G, Mostafa J, Pu D, Medlin R, Slager S, Jonnalagadda SR, Weir CR. Formative evaluation of a patient-specific clinical knowledge summarization tool. International journal of medical informatics. 2016 Feb 1; 86:126-34.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• CRE 12-321 – Cognitive Support Informatics for Nurse Medication Stewardship

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To iteratively design a prototype of a computerized clinical knowledge summarization (CKS) tool aimed at helping clinicians finding answers to their clinical questions; and to conduct a formative assessment of the usability, usefulness, efficiency, and impact of the CKS prototype on physicians' perceived decision quality compared with standard search of UpToDate and PubMed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mixed-methods observations of the interactions of 10 physicians with the CKS prototype vs. standard search in an effort to solve clinical problems posed as case vignettes. RESULTS: The CKS tool automatically summarizes patient-specific and actionable clinical recommendations from PubMed (high quality randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews) and UpToDate. Two thirds of the study participants completed 15 out of 17 usability tasks. The median time to task completion was less than 10s for 12 of the 17 tasks. The difference in search time between the CKS and standard search was not significant (median = 4.9 vs. 4.5m in). Physician's perceived decision quality was significantly higher with the CKS than with manual search (mean = 16.6 vs. 14.4; p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The CKS prototype was well-accepted by physicians both in terms of usability and usefulness. Physicians perceived better decision quality with the CKS prototype compared to standard search of PubMed and UpToDate within a similar search time. Due to the formative nature of this study and a small sample size, conclusions regarding efficiency and efficacy are exploratory.