Information Quality Challenges of Patient-Generated Data in Clinical Practice

West, Peter; Kleek, Max Van; Giordano, Richard; Weal, Mark J.; Shadbolt, Nigel

doi:10.3389/fpubh.2017.00284

Cited by 51 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[76][77][78] Recently, West and colleagues 59 described variations in data visualization, data granularity, and units of measure acted as barriers to use as did lack of contextual information. 59 These findings supported our work in that oncologists identified good data visualization as an enabler but made suggestions to include other patient information (granularity) to provide context (i.e., trends over time).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Importantly, the most significant findings of our study centered on appropriate end-users and the importance of engaging others (primary care practitioners, nurses, and patients themselves) as the appropriate end-users. West and colleagues 59 reported primary care physicians and nurses as being more flexible in using tools based on heterogeneous and varied information sources, while secondary care specialists, often expressed the need for standardized information before being able to evaluate it effectively. While oncologists in our study failed to remark on the need for standardization, they did identify other practitioners as appropriate end-users of the CV health tool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oncologists' Perceptions of a Digital Tool to Improve Cancer Survivors' Cardiovascular Health

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cardiovascular (CV) disease continues to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality with higher rates among cancer survivors than in the general population. Objective This study was aimed to understand oncology providers' attitudes toward a digital CV health tool, delivered via a tablet, to promote CV health in cancer survivors. Methods Using qualitative methods, 14 oncologists, from community and academic practice sites, were interviewed while they used the tool. Interviews were videotaped then analyzed using NVivo 11 software. Themes were inductively developed from the interviews. Results Three major themes emerged from the interviews as follows: (1) system functionality, (2) facilitators and barriers to integration, and (3) appropriate end-users. Oncologists recognized the critical role of CV health promotion among cancer survivors and identified features about the tool that would be helpful for CV health promotion. Workflow (subtheme) was a barrier to tool use. This feedback enabled tool redesign for further testing in the context of survivorship care. Conclusion Our findings emphasized the importance of identifying appropriate End-users which may include other survivorship care providers, patients, and primary care providers. Implications Our research addresses the knowledge gap in the use of digital tools in cancer survivorship care, specifically digital tools to promote CV health. Future research is needed to evaluate digital tools in cancer survivorship care. Research investigating patients as users of digital tools may provide additional insight.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncologists' Perceptions of a Digital Tool to Improve Cancer Survivors' Cardiovascular Health

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The aim of the literature review was to understand how barriers found in prior work may exist across different clinical settings. We adapted our method from our prior work [52]: we searched seven databases (ACM DL, EBSCOHost, Web of Science, SCOPUS, JSTOR, Cochrane, and PubMed) for empirical studies of the use of patient-generated data in clinical settings. The databases were queried using search terms formed from permutations of "patient", "clinician" (and related terms, such as "doctor"), and "self-tracked data" (and related terms, such as "quantified self"), resulting in 1218 results.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A final sample of thirteen clinicians (listed in Table 1) were interviewed. While most prior studies of patient-generated data use focus on healthcare within the United States [52], clinicians interviewed in this study all practised within the United Kingdom. The clinical contexts of the participants spanned cardiology, oncology, mental health, surgery, emergency care, general practice, and audiology.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Barriers to the Use of Patient-Generated Data Across Clinical Settings

West

Kleek

Giordano

et al. 2018

Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-generated data, such as data from wearable fitness trackers and smartphone apps, are viewed as a valuable information source towards personalised healthcare. However, studies in specific clinical settings have revealed diverse barriers to their effective use. In this paper, we address the following question: are there barriers prevalent across distinct workflows in clinical settings to using patient-generated data? We conducted a twopart investigation: a literature review of studies identifying such barriers; and interviews with clinical specialists across multiple roles, including emergency care, cardiology, mental health, and general practice. We identify common barriers in a six-stage workflow model of aligning patient and clinician objectives, judging data quality, evaluating data utility, rearranging data into a clinical format, interpreting data, and deciding on a plan or action. This workflow establishes common ground for HCI practitioners and researchers to explore solutions to improving the use of patient-generated data in clinical practices.

show abstract

“…1 However, thus far most digital self-monitoring devices have unknown reliability and validity, with a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of these technologies. 3,4 So, before digital self-monitoring of MS through smartphones and activity trackers could become common practice, the validity and reliability of these technologies, including their responsiveness to changes in disease status, need to be proved in real-world settings. 5 Another assumption is that smartphone apps and activity trackers could contribute to patient empowerment, with patients taking a more active role in the selfmanagement of chronic diseases, for example through symptom monitoring and adopting lifestyle measures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward Digital Self-monitoring of Multiple Sclerosis

Wendrich¹,

Oirschot²,

Martens³

et al. 2019

International Journal of MS Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CME/CNE Information Activity Available Online: To access the article, post-test, and evaluation online, go to http://www.cmscscholar.org. Target Audience: The target audience for this activity is physicians, physician assistants, nursing professionals, and other health care providers involved in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Learning Objectives: Accreditation Statement: In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC) and Delaware Media Group. The CMSC is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team. Physician Credit The CMSC designates this journal-based activity for a maximum of 0.75 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Nurse Credit The CMSC designates this enduring material for 0.75 contact hour (none in the area of pharmacology). Disclosures: Editor in Chief of the International Journal of MS Care (IJMSC), has served as physician planner for this activity. He has disclosed relationships with Springer Publishing (royalty); Qr8 (receipt of intellectual property rights/patent holder); Abide Therapeutics, GW Pharma (consulting fee); Biogen (speakers' bureau); and Adamas Pharmaceuticals (contracted research).Francois Bethoux, MD, has served as reviewer for this activity. She has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.Laurie Scudder, DNP, NP, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.Karine Wendrich, MSc, has disclosed a relationship with Orikami/MS sherpa BV (salary).Pim van Oirschot, MSc, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.Marijn Bart Martens, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.Marco Heerings, MANP, has disclosed relationships with Bayer (educational/consultancy activities) and MS sherpa BV (consulting fee).Peter Joseph Jongen, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.Lotte Krabbenborg, PhD, One peer reviewer has disclosed relationships with Genentech (consulting fee, contracted research) and Novartis (contracted research). The other peer reviewers for IJMSC have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. The staff at IJMSC, CMSC, and Delaware Media Group who are in a position to influence content have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Note: Financial relationships for some authors may have changed in the interval between listing these disclosures and publication of the article. Method of Participation: Release Date: December 1, 2019 Valid for Credit Through: December 1, 2020 In order to receive CME/CNE credit, participants must: Statements of Credit are awarded upon successful completion of the post-test with a passing score of >70% and the evaluation. Disclosure of Unlabeled Use: This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not approved by the FDA. CMSC and Delaware Media Group do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications. The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of CMSC or Delaware Media Group. Disclaimer: Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any medications, diagnostic procedures, or treatments discussed in this publication should not be used by clinicians or other health-care professionals without first evaluating their patients' conditions, considering possible contraindications or risks, reviewing any applicable manufacturer's product information, and comparing any therapeutic approach with the recommendations of other authorities.

show abstract

Information Quality Challenges of Patient-Generated Data in Clinical Practice

Cited by 51 publications

References 48 publications

Oncologists' Perceptions of a Digital Tool to Improve Cancer Survivors' Cardiovascular Health

Oncologists' Perceptions of a Digital Tool to Improve Cancer Survivors' Cardiovascular Health

Common Barriers to the Use of Patient-Generated Data Across Clinical Settings

Toward Digital Self-monitoring of Multiple Sclerosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About