Designing interactive visualizations for analyzing chronic lung diseases in a user-centered approach.

OBJECTIVES: Medical practitioners analyze numerous types of data, often using archaic representations that do not meet their needs. Pneumologists who analyze lung function exams must often consult multiple exam records manually, making comparisons cumbersome. Such shortcomings can be addressed with interactive visualizations, but these must be designed carefully with practitioners' needs in mind. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A workshop with experts was conducted to gather user requirements and common tasks. Based on the workshop results, we iteratively designed a web-based prototype, continuously consulting experts along the way. The resulting application was evaluated in a formative study via expert interviews with 3 medical practitioners. RESULTS: Participants in our study were able to solve all tasks in accordance with experts' expectations and generally viewed our system positively, though there were some usability and utility issues in the initial prototype. An improved version of our system solves these issues and includes additional customization functionalities. DISCUSSION: The study results showed that participants were able to use our system effectively to solve domain-relevant tasks, even though some shortcomings could be observed. Using a different framework with more fine-grained control over interactions and visual elements, we implemented design changes in an improved version of our prototype that needs to be evaluated in future work. CONCLUSION: Employing a user-centered design approach, we developed a visual analytics system for lung function data that allows medical practitioners to more easily analyze the progression of several key parameters over time.

Attributes, Methods, and Frameworks Used to Evaluate Wearables and Their Companion mHealth Apps: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Wearable devices, mobile technologies, and their combination have been accepted into clinical use to better assess the physical fitness and quality of life of patients and as preventive measures. Usability is pivotal for overcoming constraints and gaining users' acceptance of technology such as wearables and their companion mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, owing to limitations in design and evaluation, interactive wearables and mHealth apps have often been restricted from their full potential. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify studies that have incorporated wearable devices and determine their frequency of use in conjunction with mHealth apps or their combination. Specifically, this study aims to understand the attributes and evaluation techniques used to evaluate usability in the health care domain for these technologies and their combinations. METHODS: We conducted an extensive search across 4 electronic databases, spanning the last 30 years up to December 2021. Studies including the keywords "wearable devices," "mobile apps," "mHealth apps," "physiological data," "usability," "user experience," and "user evaluation" were considered for inclusion. A team of 5 reviewers screened the collected publications and charted the features based on the research questions. Subsequently, we categorized these characteristics following existing usability and wearable taxonomies. We applied a methodological framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 382 reports were identified from the search strategy, and 68 articles were included. Most of the studies (57/68, 84%) involved the simultaneous use of wearables and connected mobile apps. Wrist-worn commercial consumer devices such as wristbands were the most prevalent, accounting for 66% (45/68) of the wearables identified in our review. Approximately half of the data from the medical domain (32/68, 47%) focused on studies involving participants with chronic illnesses or disorders. Overall, 29 usability attributes were identified, and 5 attributes were frequently used for evaluation: satisfaction (34/68, 50%), ease of use (27/68, 40%), user experience (16/68, 24%), perceived usefulness (18/68, 26%), and effectiveness (15/68, 22%). Only 10% (7/68) of the studies used a user- or human-centered design paradigm for usability evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Our scoping review identified the types and categories of wearable devices and mHealth apps, their frequency of use in studies, and their implementation in the medical context. In addition, we examined the usability evaluation of these technologies: methods, attributes, and frameworks. Within the array of available wearables and mHealth apps, health care providers encounter the challenge of selecting devices and companion apps that are effective, user-friendly, and compatible with user interactions. The current gap in usability and user experience in health care research limits our understanding of the strengths and limitations of wearable technologies and their companion apps. Additional research is necessary to overcome these limitations.

Visualization Techniques of Time-Oriented Data for the Comparison of Single Patients With Multiple Patients or Cohorts: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Visual analysis and data delivery in the form of visualizations are of great importance in health care, as such forms of presentation can reduce errors and improve care and can also help provide new insights into long-term disease progression. Information visualization and visual analytics also address the complexity of long-term, time-oriented patient data by reducing inherent complexity and facilitating a focus on underlying and hidden patterns. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to provide an overview of visualization techniques for time-oriented data in health care, supporting the comparison of patients. We systematically collected literature and report on the visualization techniques supporting the comparison of time-based data sets of single patients with those of multiple patients or their cohorts and summarized the use of these techniques. METHODS: This scoping review used the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. After all collected articles were screened by 16 reviewers according to the criteria, 6 reviewers extracted the set of variables under investigation. The characteristics of these variables were based on existing taxonomies or identified through open coding. RESULTS: Of the 249 screened articles, we identified 22 (8.8%) that fit all criteria and reviewed them in depth. We collected and synthesized findings from these articles for medical aspects such as medical context, medical objective, and medical data type, as well as for the core investigated aspects of visualization techniques, interaction techniques, and supported tasks. The extracted articles were published between 2003 and 2019 and were mostly situated in clinical research. These systems used a wide range of visualization techniques, most frequently showing changes over time. Timelines and temporal line charts occurred 8 times each, followed by histograms with 7 occurrences and scatterplots with 5 occurrences. We report on the findings quantitatively through visual summarization, as well as qualitatively. CONCLUSIONS: The articles under review in general mitigated complexity through visualization and supported diverse medical objectives. We identified 3 distinct patient entities: single patients, multiple patients, and cohorts. Cohorts were typically visualized in condensed form, either through prior data aggregation or through visual summarization, whereas visualization of individual patients often contained finer details. All the systems provided mechanisms for viewing and comparing patient data. However, explicitly comparing a single patient with multiple patients or a cohort was supported only by a few systems. These systems mainly use basic visualization techniques, with some using novel visualizations tailored to a specific task. Overall, we found the visual comparison of measurements between single and multiple patients or cohorts to be underdeveloped, and we argue for further research in a systematic review, as well as the usefulness of a design space.