研究论文:人机术语界面研究

J. Cimino, V. Patel, A. Kushniruk
{"title":"研究论文:人机术语界面研究","authors":"J. Cimino, V. Patel, A. Kushniruk","doi":"10.1136/jamia.2001.0080163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To explore the use of an observational, cognitive-based approach for differentiating between successful, suboptimal, and failed entry of coded data by clinicians in actual practice, and to detect whether causes for unsuccessful attempts to capture true intended meaning were due to terminology content, terminology representation, or user interface problems. Design: Observational study with videotaping and subsequent coding of data entry events in an outpatient clinic at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Participants: Eight attending physicians, 18 resident physicians, and 1 nurse practitioner, using the Medical Entities Dictionary (MED) to record patient problems, medications, and adverse reactions in an outpatient medical record system. Measurements: Classification of data entry events as successful, suboptimal, or failed, and estimation of cause; recording of system response time and total event time. Results: Two hundred thirty-eight data entry events were analyzed; 71.0 percent were successful, 6.3 percent suboptimal, and 22.7 percent failed; unsuccessful entries were due to problems with content in 13.0 percent of events, representation problems in 10.1 percent of events, and usability problems in 5.9 percent of events. Response time averaged 0.74 sec, and total event time averaged 40.4 sec. Of an additional 209 tasks related to drug dose and frequency terms, 94 percent were successful, 0.5 percent were suboptimal, and 6 percent failed, for an overall success rate of 82 percent. Conclusions: Data entry by clinicians using the outpatient system and the MED was generally successful and efficient. The cognitive-based observational approach permitted detection of false- positive (suboptimal) and false-negative (failed due to user interface) data entry. � J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8:163-173.","PeriodicalId":344533,"journal":{"name":"J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"41","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research Paper: Studying the Human- Computer-Terminology Interface\",\"authors\":\"J. Cimino, V. Patel, A. Kushniruk\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jamia.2001.0080163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To explore the use of an observational, cognitive-based approach for differentiating between successful, suboptimal, and failed entry of coded data by clinicians in actual practice, and to detect whether causes for unsuccessful attempts to capture true intended meaning were due to terminology content, terminology representation, or user interface problems. Design: Observational study with videotaping and subsequent coding of data entry events in an outpatient clinic at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Participants: Eight attending physicians, 18 resident physicians, and 1 nurse practitioner, using the Medical Entities Dictionary (MED) to record patient problems, medications, and adverse reactions in an outpatient medical record system. Measurements: Classification of data entry events as successful, suboptimal, or failed, and estimation of cause; recording of system response time and total event time. Results: Two hundred thirty-eight data entry events were analyzed; 71.0 percent were successful, 6.3 percent suboptimal, and 22.7 percent failed; unsuccessful entries were due to problems with content in 13.0 percent of events, representation problems in 10.1 percent of events, and usability problems in 5.9 percent of events. Response time averaged 0.74 sec, and total event time averaged 40.4 sec. Of an additional 209 tasks related to drug dose and frequency terms, 94 percent were successful, 0.5 percent were suboptimal, and 6 percent failed, for an overall success rate of 82 percent. Conclusions: Data entry by clinicians using the outpatient system and the MED was generally successful and efficient. The cognitive-based observational approach permitted detection of false- positive (suboptimal) and false-negative (failed due to user interface) data entry. � J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8:163-173.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"41\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2001.0080163\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2001.0080163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41

摘要

目的:探讨临床医生在实际操作中使用一种观察性的、基于认知的方法来区分编码数据输入的成功、次优和失败,并检测捕获真实意图的尝试失败的原因是否由于术语内容、术语表示或用户界面问题。设计:在纽约长老会医院门诊对数据录入事件进行录像和随后编码的观察性研究。参与者:8名主治医生,18名住院医生和1名执业护士,使用医疗实体词典(MED)在门诊医疗记录系统中记录患者的问题,药物和不良反应。测量:将数据输入事件分类为成功、次优或失败,并估计原因;记录系统响应时间和总事件时间。结果:分析了238个数据输入事件;71.0%成功,6.3%次优,22.7%失败;不成功的条目是由于13.0%的事件中的内容问题,10.1%的事件中的表示问题,以及5.9%的事件中的可用性问题。反应时间平均为0.74秒,总事件时间平均为40.4秒。在与药物剂量和频率相关的额外209项任务中,94%成功,0.5%次优,6%失败,总体成功率为82%。结论:临床医生使用门诊系统和MED的数据输入通常是成功和有效的。基于认知的观察方法允许检测假阳性(次优)和假阴性(由于用户界面失败)数据输入。[J]中华医学杂志,2001;8(3):693 - 693。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Research Paper: Studying the Human- Computer-Terminology Interface
Objective: To explore the use of an observational, cognitive-based approach for differentiating between successful, suboptimal, and failed entry of coded data by clinicians in actual practice, and to detect whether causes for unsuccessful attempts to capture true intended meaning were due to terminology content, terminology representation, or user interface problems. Design: Observational study with videotaping and subsequent coding of data entry events in an outpatient clinic at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Participants: Eight attending physicians, 18 resident physicians, and 1 nurse practitioner, using the Medical Entities Dictionary (MED) to record patient problems, medications, and adverse reactions in an outpatient medical record system. Measurements: Classification of data entry events as successful, suboptimal, or failed, and estimation of cause; recording of system response time and total event time. Results: Two hundred thirty-eight data entry events were analyzed; 71.0 percent were successful, 6.3 percent suboptimal, and 22.7 percent failed; unsuccessful entries were due to problems with content in 13.0 percent of events, representation problems in 10.1 percent of events, and usability problems in 5.9 percent of events. Response time averaged 0.74 sec, and total event time averaged 40.4 sec. Of an additional 209 tasks related to drug dose and frequency terms, 94 percent were successful, 0.5 percent were suboptimal, and 6 percent failed, for an overall success rate of 82 percent. Conclusions: Data entry by clinicians using the outpatient system and the MED was generally successful and efficient. The cognitive-based observational approach permitted detection of false- positive (suboptimal) and false-negative (failed due to user interface) data entry. � J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8:163-173.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信