Slides presented at IEEE ICHI 2014 in Verona. - https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/454979 - http://ichi2014.di.univr.it/partecipants/program/

1. DESIGNING
A
USEFUL
AND
USABLE
MOBILE
EMR
APPLICATION
THROUGH
A
PARTICIPATORY
DESIGN
METHODOLOGY:
A
CASE
STUDY
ir.
Robin
De
Croon,
dr.
Joris
Klerkx,
prof.
dr.
ir.
Erik
Duval
http://about.me/robindecroon
&
robin.decroon@cs.kuleuven.be
IEEE
International
Conference
on
Healthcare
Informatics
2014
(ICHI
2014)

2. Who
Am
I?
•
Robin
De
Croon
•
Scientific
Researcher
•
Computer
Science
background
•
KU
Leuven
(Belgium)
•
Human
Computer
Interaction
•
Prof.
dr.
ir.
Erik
Duval
•
Dr.
Joris
Klerkx
•
datavislab
• http://datavislab.org
Saturday
21
February
15
2

3. Secure
&
Usable
medical
applications
in
the
cloud
(MAPC)
•
IWT
R&D
company
project
è
“How
can
a
mobile
device
help
general
practioners,
using
context
and
mobile
affordances,
to
maintain
an
electronic
patient
file
on
a
house
visit?
Saturday
21
February
15
3

4. Secure
&
Usable
medical
applications
in
the
cloud
(MAPC)
•
IWT
R&D
company
project
à
case
study
è
“How
can
a
mobile
device
help
general
practioners,
using
context
and
mobile
affordances,
to
maintain
an
electronic
patient
file
on
a
house
visit?
Saturday
21
February
15
4

5. target
user
Target
Audience
Saturday
21
February
15
5
• General
Practitioners
in
Flanders
(Belgium)
Independent
of:
•
Experience
&
age
•
Individual
or
group
practice
•
ICT-­‐knowledge
•
Current
medical
software
http://marketingyoucanuse.com/wp-­‐content/uploads/2010/12/HittingTarget.jpg

6. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
6
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

7. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
7
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

8. Related
work
(i)
•
Which
information
does
a
general
practitioner
need?
• Abd
Ghani,
M.
K.
(2011).
The
design
of
flexible
Pervasive
Electronic
Health
Record
(PEHR).
In
2011
IEEE
Colloquium
on
Humanities,
Science
and
Engineering
(pp.
249–254).
IEEE.
doi:10.1109/CHUSER.2011.6163727
• Plancke,
L.
(2013).
Het
thuisdossier
voor
de
wachtarts
:
stand
van
zaken.
Universiteit
Gent.
Retrieved
from
http://lib.ugent.be/fulltxt/
RUG01/002/002/163/RUG01-­‐002002163_2013_0001_AC.pdf
•
Mobile
applications
in
the
medical
world
• Fischer,
S.
(2002).
Handheld
Computing
in
Medicine.
Journal
of
the
American
Medical
Informatics
Association,
10(2),
139–149.
doi:
10.1197/jamia.M1180
• Ebell,
M.
H.,
Gaspar,
D.
L.,
&
Khurana,
S.
(1997).
Family
physicians’
preferences
for
computerized
decision-­‐support
hardware
and
software.
The
Journal
of
Family
Practice,
45(2),
137–141.
• Page,
T.
(2013).
Usability
of
text
input
interfaces
in
smartphones.
J.
of
Design
Research,
11(1),
39.
doi:10.1504/JDR.2013.054065
• Kelly,
J.
(2000).
Going
wireless.
Hospitals
&
Health
Networks
/
AHA,
74(11),
65–66,
68.
doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.41
• Nyssen,
M.,
Thomeer,
K.,
&
Buyl,
R.
(2010).
Generating
and
transmitting
ambulatory
electronic
medical
prescriptions.
In
P.
Bamidis
&
N.
Pallikarakis
(Eds.),
XII
Mediterranean
Conference
on
Medical
and
Biological
Engineering
and
Computing
2010
(pp.
890–892).
Springer
Berlin
Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-­‐3-­‐642-­‐13039-­‐7_225
• Chen,
Y.,
&
Atwood,
M.
E.
(2010).
Challenges
of
Mobile
Clinical
System
Design:
What
do
Nurses
Think?
In
2010
43rd
Hawaii
International
Conference
on
System
Sciences
(pp.
1–9).
IEEE.
doi:10.1109/HICSS.2010.99
• Grossman,
J.
M.,
Gerland,
A.,
Reed,
M.
C.,
&
Fahlman,
C.
(2007).
Physicians’
experiences
using
commercial
e-­‐prescribing
systems.
Health
Affairs
(Project
Hope),
26(3),
w393–404.
doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.w393
Saturday
21
February
15
8

9. Related
work
(ii)
•
Usability
problems
with
medical
software
• Grossman,
J.
M.,
Gerland,
A.,
Reed,
M.
C.,
&
Fahlman,
C.
(2007).
Physicians’
experiences
using
commercial
e-­‐
prescribing
systems.
Health
Affairs
(Project
Hope),
26(3),
w393–404.
doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.w393
• Schumacher,
R.
M.,
Berkowitz,
L.,
Abramson,
P.,
&
Liebovitz,
D.
(2010).
Electronic
Health
Records:
Physician’s
Perspective
on
Usability.
Proceedings
of
the
Human
Factors
and
Ergonomics
Society
Annual
Meeting,
54(12),
816–820.
doi:10.1177/154193121005401202
• Van
der
Sijs,
H.,
Aarts,
J.,
Vulto,
A.,
&
Berg,
M.
(2006).
Overriding
of
drug
safety
alerts
in
computerized
physician
order
entry.
Journal
of
the
American
Medical
Informatics
Association
:
JAMIA,
13(2),
138–47.
doi:10.1197/
jamia.M1809
• Williams,
W.
G.,
&
Morgan,
J.
M.
(1995).
The
clinician-­‐information
interface.
Medinfo.
MEDINFO,
8
Pt
1,
801–5.
Retrieved
from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8591334
• Devine,
E.
B.,
Hollingworth,
W.,
Hansen,
R.
N.,
Lawless,
N.
M.,
Wilson-­‐Norton,
J.
L.,
Martin,
D.
P.,
…
Sullivan,
S.
D.
(2010).
Electronic
prescribing
at
the
point
of
care:
a
time-­‐motion
study
in
the
primary
care
setting.
Health
Services
Research,
45(1),
152–71.
doi:10.1111/j.1475-­‐6773.2009.01063.x
• Han,
S.,
Harkke,
V.,
Mustonen,
P.,
Seppanen,
M.,
&
Kallio,
M.
(2004).
Mobilizing
Medical
Information
and
Knowledge:
Some
Insights
from
a
Survey.
Retrieved
from
http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2004/69/
Saturday
21
February
15
9

10. Related
work
(iii)
•
Participatory
design
in
the
medical
domain
• Tang,
K.,
Hirano,
S.,
Cheng,
K.,
&
Hayes,
G.
(2012).
Balancing
Caregiver
and
Clinician
Needs
in
a
Mobile
Health
Informatics
Tool
for
Preterm
Infants.
In
Proceedings
of
the
6th
International
Conference
on
Pervasive
Computing
Technologies
for
Healthcare
(pp.
1–8).
IEEE.
doi:10.4108/icst.pervasivehealth.
2012.248716
• Hwang,
A.,
Truong,
K.,
&
Mihailidis,
A.
(2012).
Using
participatory
design
to
determine
the
needs
of
informal
caregivers
for
smart
home
user
interfaces.
In
Proceedings
of
the
6th
International
Conference
on
Pervasive
Computing
Technologies
for
Healthcare
(pp.
41–48).
IEEE.
doi:10.4108/
icst.pervasivehealth.2012.248671
• Miller,
A.,
Pater,
J.,
&
Mynatt,
E.
(2013).
Design
Strategies
for
Youth-­‐Focused
Pervasive
Social
Health
Games.
In
Proceedings
of
the
ICTs
for
improving
Patients
Rehabilitation
Research
Techniques.
IEEE.
doi:
10.4108/pervasivehealth.2013.252081
•
Using
context
• Stocky,
T.,
Faaborg,
A.,
&
Lieberman,
H.
(2004).
A
commonsense
approach
to
predictive
text
entry.
In
Extended
abstracts
of
the
2004
conference
on
Human
factors
and
computing
systems
-­‐
CHI
’04
(p.
1163).
New
York,
New
York,
USA:
ACM
Press.
doi:10.1145/985921.986014
• Abowd,
G.
D.,
Dey,
A.
K.,
Brown,
P.
J.,
Davies,
N.,
Smith,
M.,
&
Steggles,
P.
(1999).
Towards
a
Better
Understanding
of
Context
and
Context-­‐Awareness.
Ubiquitous
Computing/Handheld
and
Ubiquitous
Computing
(pp.
304–307).
doi:10.1007/3-­‐540-­‐48157-­‐5_29
Saturday
21
February
15
10

11. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
11
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

12. Saturday
21
February
15
12
https://www.ehealth.fgov.be/nl/registratie-­‐van-­‐de-­‐medische-­‐softwarepakketten

13. Saturday
21
February
15
13

14. Where
should
I
register
medication?
Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
14
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

15. Initial
Questionnaire
&
Talks
•
What
kind
of
information
or
material
do
you
carry
with
you
during
house
visits?
•
Do
you
already
use
an
EMR
application
or,
if
not,
what
kinds
of
patient
information
do
you
take
with
you?
•
Which
data
is
entered
in
the
EMR
application
(after
the
house
visits)?
•
How
do
you
prescribe
medicine?
•
Do
you
take
pictures
of
wounds
or
rash?
•
What
kind
of
patients
do
you
normally
treat
during
a
house
visit?
•
…
Saturday
21
February
15
15
https://picasaweb.google.com/100923738088214702616/Omini3d#5456698262314545906
http://goo.gl/Wxh3Gi
(questionnaire,
Dutch)

16. Battery
Saturday
21
February
15
16

17. Weight
Saturday
21
February
15
17
http://www.elmospa.com/userfiles/image/Varie/forza.png

18. No
internet
connection
Saturday
21
February
15
18

19. Time
expensive
Saturday
21
February
15
19

20. Information
overload
Saturday
21
February
15
20
http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/5/005/061/1de/3cc6bc7.jpg

21. Usability
Saturday
21
February
15
21

22. Result
•
Patient
data
gets
rarely
registered
on
a
house
visit
•
Patient
data
registered
afterwards
is
error
prone
è
Solution
is
needed!
Saturday
21
February
15
22
http://static.squarespace.com/static/52e99ee6e4b074062a408c89/t/52eb6098e4b008799dcd8d23/1391157403129/3D%20Person%20-­‐%20Magnifing%20Glass-­‐Edited.png

23. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
23
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

24. Funtional
Requirement
Research
Question
•
“How
can
a
mobile
device
help
general
practioners,
using
context
and
mobile
affordances,
to
maintain
an
electronic
patient
file
on
a
house
visit?
•
What
information
does
a
GP
instantly
needs
on
a
house
visit?
•
How
should
mobile
affordances
be
applied
when
designing
a
mobile
health
record?
è
Not
just
a
port
of
existing
applications!
Saturday
21
February
15
24

25. Timeline
prototypes
Saturday
21
February
15
25
Paper
prototype
5
Sketches
Paper
prototype
1
Paper
prototype
4
Paper
prototype
3
Paper
prototype
2
Digital
prototype
Design
V1
5
GPs
3
GPs
3
GPs
3
GPs
5
GPs
6
HCI
colleagues
53
students

26. Some
Sketches
Saturday
21
February
15
26

27. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
27

28. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
28
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

29. Saturday
21
February
15
29
Demonstration

30. Dashboard
Saturday
21
February
15
30
Sá,
M.
de,
&
Carriço,
L.
(2006).
Low-­‐Fi
Prototyping
for
Mobile
Devices.
In
CHI
’06
Extended
Abstracts:
Human
Factors
in
Computing
Systems
(pp.
694–699).
ACM.
doi:10.1145/1125451.1125592

31. Subjective
Input
Saturday
21
February
15
31
Stocky,
T.,
Faaborg,
A.,
&
Lieberman,
H.
(2004).
A
commonsense
approach
to
predictive
text
entry.
In
Extended
abstracts
of
the
2004
conference
on
Human
factors
and
computing
systems
-­‐
CHI
’04
(p.
1163).
New
York,
New
York,
USA:
ACM
Press.
doi:10.1145/985921.986014

32. Objective
Input
Saturday
21
February
15
32
Weibel,
N.,
Emmenegger,
C.,
Lyons,
J.,
Dixit,
R.,
Hill,
L.,
&
Hollan,
J.
(2013).
Interpreter-­‐Mediated
Physician-­‐Patient
Communication:
Opportunities
for
Multimodal
Healthcare
Interfaces.
In
Proceedings
of
the
ICTs
for
improving
Patients
Rehabilitation
Research
Techniques.
IEEE.
doi:10.4108/icst.pervasivehealth.2013.252026

33. Messages
Saturday
21
February
15
33

34. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
34

35. Saturday
21
February
15
35
Mobile
Affordances

36. Saturday
21
February
15
36
Medical
Affordances

37. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
37

38. GPS
to
patient
&
open
right
file
Saturday
21
February
15
38

39. Workflow
•
Information
•
Messages
•
SOAP
subjective
à
objective
à
assessment
à
planning
• Medication
Saturday
21
February
15
39
Robin
De
Croon

40. Patient
records
Saturday
21
February
15
40

41. Filter
messages
Saturday
21
February
15
41

42. Camera
&
calendar
&
search
Saturday
21
February
15
42

43. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
43

44. Saturday
21
February
15
44

45. Saturday
21
February
15
45

46. Requirement
3
quick
overview
of
the
most
important
data
Saturday
21
February
15
46

47. Participatory
design
approach
•
WEL
à
Onderzoek
•
Vergelijkend
onderzoek
Saturday
21
February
15
47

48. Final
Dashboard
Saturday
21
February
15
48

49. Saturday
21
February
15
49

50. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
50

51. Keyboard
uses
much
screen
space
Saturday
21
February
15
51

52. Speech-­‐to-­‐Text
Saturday
21
February
15
52

53. Saturday
21
February
15
53

54. Input
through
colored
sliders
Saturday
21
February
15
54
Weibel,
N.,
Emmenegger,
C.,
Lyons,
J.,
Dixit,
R.,
Hill,
L.,
&
Hollan,
J.
(2013).
Interpreter-­‐Mediated
Physician-­‐Patient
Communication:
Opportunities
for
Multimodal
Healthcare
Interfaces.
In
Proceedings
of
the
ICTs
for
improving
Patients
Rehabilitation
Research
Techniques.
IEEE.
doi:10.4108/icst.pervasivehealth.2013.252026

55. Auto
Complete
Saturday
21
February
15
55

56. Assessment
à
Tree
Structure
(ICPC,
ICD10,
…)
Saturday
21
February
15
56

57. Problems
è
Requirements
①
Not
optimized
for
mobile
è
Use
mobile
affordances
②
Too
slow
è
Show
timely
&
relevant
information
③
Necessary
patient
information
è
Quick
overview
important
information
④
Registering
data
è
Efficient
and
effective
data
input
⑤
Prescribing
medicine
è
Raise
motivation
to
register
Saturday
21
February
15
57

58. Slow
law
adaptation
Saturday
21
February
15
58

59. Tools
Saturday
21
February
15
59

60. Pharmocovigilance
Saturday
21
February
15
60
http://www.amazingpregnancy.com/blog/wp-­‐content/uploads/2013/05/drug_or_alimentary_supplement_idea_of_health_and_disease.jpg

61. Methodology:
Participatory
Design
1. Initial
research
•
existing
research
papers
•
existing
electronic
patient
files
and
applications
2. Discovery
process
•
initial
questionnaire
•
initial
talks
3. Rapid
prototyping
•
functional
requirements
•
prototypes
(paper
&
digital)
•
usability
evaluation
Saturday
21
February
15
61
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/7351141086_85640e3c06.jpg
Where
should
I
register
medication?
Spinuzzi,
C.
(2005).
The
methodology
of
participatory
design.
Technical
Communication,
52(August
2004),
163–174.

62. Saturday
21
February
15
62
Schulenberg,
S.
E.,
&
Melton,
A.
M.
a.
(2008).
The
Computer
Aversion,
Attitudes,
and
Familiarity
Index
(CAAFI):
A
validity
study.
Computers
in
Human
Behavior,
24(6),
2620–2638.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.002
Computer
Aversion,
Attitudes
and
Familiarity
Index
(CAAFI)
Questionnaire

63. System
Usability
Scale
(SUS)
Questionnaire
Saturday
21
February
15
63
http://iqcontent.com/blog/files/wp/2013/05/sus.png
Bangor,
A.,
Kortum,
P.,
&
Miller,
J.
(2009).
Determining
what
individual
SUS
scores
mean:
Adding
an
adjective
rating
scale.
Journal
of
Usability
Studies,
4(3),
114–123.
Retrieved
from
http://66.39.39.113/upa_publications/jus/2009may/JUS_Bangor_May2009.pdf

64. Evaluation
general
practice
students
•
During
general
practice
course
Leuven
•
Last
year
general
practice
•
≈
120
hours
experience
•
Presentation
≈
30
minutes
•
Accompanied
with
questionnaire
Saturday
21
February
15
64

65. 53
last
year
general
practice
students
Gender
Age
Saturday
21
February
15
65
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
53
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
17
tablet
smartphone
man
geen
tablet
dumbphone
vrouw
0
10
20
30
40
50

66. Computer
Aversion,
Attitudes
and
Familiarity
Index
(CAAFI)
Score
Students
Saturday
21
February
15
66
Factors Average Standard
Deviation
Factor
1
(familiarity)
0.76 0.75
Factor
2
(attitudes)
1.91 0.69
Factor
3
(aversion)
0.68 1.1
Schulenberg,
S.
E.,
&
Melton,
A.
M.
a.
(2008).
The
Computer
Aversion,
Attitudes,
and
Familiarity
Index
(CAAFI):
A
validity
study.
Computers
in
Human
Behavior,
24(6),
2620–2638.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.002

67. System
Usability
Scale
(SUS)
Score
students
Saturday
21
February
15
67
Bangor,
A.,
Kortum,
P.,
&
Miller,
J.
(2009).
Determining
what
individual
SUS
scores
mean:
Adding
an
adjective
rating
scale.
Journal
of
Usability
Studies,
4(3),
114–123.
Retrieved
from
http://66.39.39.113/upa_publications/jus/2009may/JUS_Bangor_May2009.pdf
Average
score:
70

68. Saturday
21
February
15
68
Likert
Scores
students
0.03
0.02
0.06
0.12
0.32
0.04
0.12
0.2
0.04
0.02
0.42
0.22
0.3
0.28
0.14
0.12
0.04
0.19
0.6
0.44
0.36
0.68
0.5
0.7
0.03
0.08
0.08
0.04
0.14
0.36
0.26
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SOAP
-­‐
Planning
SOAP
-­‐
evaluation
SOAP
-­‐
objective
SOAP
-­‐
subjective
Documents
Patient
informartion
Dashboard
Very
poor
Poor
Neutral
Good
Very
good

69. Difference
between
generations
•
SOAP
note
system
<-­‐>
Medical
History
De
Croon,
R.,
Klerkx,
J.,
Duval,
E.
(2014).
The
involvement
of
students
in
the
user-­‐centered
design
process
of
a
mobile
health
record:
a
case
study.
Workshop
on
Designing
the
Future
of
Mobile
Healthcare
Support.
Toronto,
Canada,
23
September
2014,
accepted.
Saturday
21
February
15
69

70. Conclusion
•
Smaller
subset
on
dashboard
•
Five
core
considerations
•
Difference
between
generations
•
Interface
under
active
development
Saturday
21
February
15
70
http://cdn.makeuseof.com/wp-­‐content/uploads/2012/12/3D-­‐Man-­‐Presenting-­‐Intro-­‐Image.jpg?a53b57

71. Future
work
•
Generation
difference
/
two
paradigms
(SOAP
<-­‐>
EBM)
•
Expand
research
(not
only
Belgian
markets)
•
Can
a
GP
inform
a
patient
with
an
EMD
more
efficiently?
Saturday
21
February
15
71

72. You
think
our
work
interesting?
• We’re
expanding
our
team!
à
erik.duval@cs.kuleuven.be
Saturday
21
February
15
72

73. Thank
you!
Saturday
21
February
15
73
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-­‐gZjNR3XVULs/T_ZOVgE-­‐5lI/AAAAAAAAAg8/6YVmd5Q064o/s1600/questions11.jpg
robin.decroon@cs.kuleuven.be