These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27577458)

  • 1. The Benefits of a Formative Evaluation for Developing a Highly Innovative Software: The Case of the handoverEHR.
    Przysucha M; Flemming D; Hübner U
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2016; 228():619-23. PubMed ID: 27577458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cognitive Maps to Visualise Clinical Cases in Handovers. Design, Implementation, Usability, and Attractiveness Testing.
    Flemming D; Przysucha M; Hübner U
    Methods Inf Med; 2015; 54(5):412-23. PubMed ID: 26391999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Building an Electronic Handover Tool for Physicians Using a Collaborative Approach between Clinicians and the Development Team.
    Guilbeault P; Momtahan K; Hudson J
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2015; 208():153-9. PubMed ID: 25676965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Agile eHealth Usability Evaluation: A Triangulative Approach to Promoting the Usability of eHealth Systems.
    Sinabell I; Ammenwerth E
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2024 Apr; 313():234-240. PubMed ID: 38682536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Optimizing the user interface of a data entry module for an electronic patient record for cardiac rehabilitation: A mixed method usability approach.
    van Engen-Verheul MM; Peute LW; de Keizer NF; Peek N; Jaspers MW
    Int J Med Inform; 2016 Mar; 87():15-26. PubMed ID: 26806708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Usability problems do not heal by themselves: National survey on physicians' experiences with EHRs in Finland.
    Kaipio J; Lääveri T; Hyppönen H; Vainiomäki S; Reponen J; Kushniruk A; Borycki E; Vänskä J
    Int J Med Inform; 2017 Jan; 97():266-281. PubMed ID: 27919385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Opportunistically discovering usability requirements for a clinical handover system.
    Kaufmann D; Parry D; Carlsen V; Carter P; Parry E; Westbrook L
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2013; 192():157-61. PubMed ID: 23920535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Usability of a touchscreen assessment tool (TATOO) prototype for clinicians and typically developing children.
    Danial-Saad A; Corzani M; Tacconi C; Chiari L
    Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2024 Apr; 19(3):951-961. PubMed ID: 36322675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Task-specific usability requirements of electronic medical records systems: Lessons learned from a national survey of end-users.
    Farzandipour M; Meidani Z; Riazi H; Sadeqi Jabali M
    Inform Health Soc Care; 2018 Sep; 43(3):280-299. PubMed ID: 28398097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Design and validation of a questionnaire in Spanish language for software usability evaluation.
    Barajas-Bustillos MA; Maldonado-Macías A; Reyes-Martinez RM; García-Alcaraz JL; Hernández Arellano JL; Avelar Sosa L
    Work; 2019; 64(3):453-459. PubMed ID: 31658079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The value of Retrospective and Concurrent Think Aloud in formative usability testing of a physician data query tool.
    Peute LW; de Keizer NF; Jaspers MW
    J Biomed Inform; 2015 Jun; 55():1-10. PubMed ID: 25733166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Usability of a patient education and motivation tool using heuristic evaluation.
    Joshi A; Arora M; Dai L; Price K; Vizer L; Sears A
    J Med Internet Res; 2009 Nov; 11(4):e47. PubMed ID: 19897458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Methods of usability testing in the development of eHealth applications: A scoping review.
    Maramba I; Chatterjee A; Newman C
    Int J Med Inform; 2019 Jun; 126():95-104. PubMed ID: 31029270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Investigation of usability problems of electronic medical record systems in the emergency department.
    Shin GW; Lee Y; Park T; Cho I; Yun MH; Bahn S; Lee JH
    Work; 2022; 72(1):221-238. PubMed ID: 34120924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. How will we know if it's working? A multi-faceted approach to measuring usability of a specialty-specific electronic medical record.
    Hollin I; Griffin M; Kachnowski S
    Health Informatics J; 2012 Sep; 18(3):219-32. PubMed ID: 23011817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A usability design checklist for Mobile electronic data capturing forms: the validation process.
    Mugisha A; Nankabirwa V; Tylleskär T; Babic A
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2019 Jan; 19(1):4. PubMed ID: 30626390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Ten factors to consider when developing usability scenarios and tasks for health information technology.
    Russ AL; Saleem JJ
    J Biomed Inform; 2018 Feb; 78():123-133. PubMed ID: 29329702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A Digital Cognitive Aid for Anesthesia to Support Intraoperative Crisis Management: Results of the User-Centered Design Process.
    Schild S; Sedlmayr B; Schumacher AK; Sedlmayr M; Prokosch HU; St Pierre M;
    JMIR Mhealth Uhealth; 2019 Apr; 7(4):e13226. PubMed ID: 31033445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A usability study of a mobile health application for rural Ghanaian midwives.
    Vélez O; Okyere PB; Kanter AS; Bakken S
    J Midwifery Womens Health; 2014; 59(2):184-91. PubMed ID: 24400748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Engineering the electronic health record for safety: a multi-level video-based approach to diagnosing and preventing technology-induced error arising from usability problems.
    Borycki EM; Kushniruk AW; Kuwata S; Kannry J
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2011; 166():197-205. PubMed ID: 21685625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.