Design and implementation of maternal-infant clinical trial recruitment alert using linked electronic medical records, and evaluation of researcher-perceived alert usability
Panganiban, H. P.; Segal, A.; Kuschel, C.
Show abstract
Background Clinical decision support systems configured as electronic medical records alerts can support clinical trial recruitment by identifying eligible participants. While they are typically used to evaluate a single patient record, their application for a linked maternal infant chart has not been extensively explored. Objective This project aimed to design and implement a clinical trial alert using linked maternal infant records and to evaluate researchers perceived usability. Materials and Methods We conducted a two phase quality assurance project: (1) design and implementation of an alert aligned with the anticipated recruitment workflow, and (2) evaluation of usability using the System Usability Scale. Basic content analysis described the alert design and implementation processes, while quantitative scoring assessed perceived usability. Results Over a 12 month period, only one alert was triggered due to changes in the recruitment workflow. Two silent alerts assessed maternal eligibility in outpatient and infant eligibility in inpatient settings. Three of four researchers completed the survey, yielding a score of 92.5, indicating excellent usability. Conclusion Although the alert was technically functional and perceived to have excellent usability, its performance was limited by deviations from the intended recruitment workflow. Researcher engagement and recruitment workflow alignment emerged as critical factors influencing alert utility. Clinical trial alerts for linked maternal infant records can be designed and implemented with excellent usability; however, consistent adherence to the recruitment workflow is essential. Broader application in additional study settings is recommended.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 95%
- Ethical review of clinical research with generative AI: Evaluating ChatGPT’s accuracy and reproducibility 94%
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Strategies and Tools for electronic health records and physician workflow alignment: A scoping review protocol 95%
- Scientific hypothesis generation process in clinical research: a secondary data analytic tool versus experience study protocol 94%
- Exposure to and engagement with digital psychoeducational content and community related to maternal mental health by perinatal persons and mothers: design of an online survey with optional follow-up and participant characteristics 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- “It reminds me and motivates me” : Human-centered design and implementation of an interactive, SMS-based digital intervention to improve early retention on antiretroviral therapy: usability and acceptability among new initiates in a high-volume, public clinic in Malawi 94%
- Identifying clinical skill gaps of healthcare workers using a digital clinical decision support algorithm during outpatient pediatric consultations in primary health centers in Rwanda 93%
- Clinical code sets and the problem of redundancy in code set repositories 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving Patient Engagement in Phase 2 Clinical Trials with a Trial-specific Patient Decision Aid (tPDA): A Development and Usability Study 95%
- Understanding how the design and implementation of Online Consultations influence primary care outcomes: Systematic review of evidence with recommendations for designers, providers, and researchers 94%
- Design and implementation of a system for automated monitoring of adherence to evidenced-based clinical guideline recommendations 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.