The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Is This Good or Bad?: Redesigning Visual Displays of Medical Test Results in Patient Portals to Provide Context and Meaning
Abstract
We describe an ongoing effort to improve communication of medical test results directly to patients by providing important contextual information about the test results in a graphical format that is well suited to online patient portals. We undertook an iterative, user-centered design process to explore ways to design meaningful representations of test results. We present findings from this process that have important design implications for communicating test results via online patient portals.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Previous literature emphasizes incorporating concise and easily understandable textual details in visualizations while visualizing health data to support communication.
“Previous literature has also emphasized the importance of incorporating concise and easily understandable textual details in visualizations while visualizing health data to support communication [49, 64].”
From A Data Visualization Tool for Patients and Healthcare Providers to Communicate during Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0445 · DOI
- 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.481 · DOI · Paper page
- Sarah T. Hawley Brian Zikmund-Fisher Peter Ubel Aleksandra Jancovic Todd Lucas and Angela Fagerlin. 2008. The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient education and counseling 73 3 448--455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023 · DOI
- Sarah T. Hawley Brian Zikmund-Fisher Peter Ubel Aleksandra Jancovic Todd Lucas and Angela Fagerlin. 2008. The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient education and counseling 73 3 448--455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023 · DOI
- 10.1197/jamia.M0978 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2010.2011 · DOI
- 10.1145/2702123.2702392 · DOI
- 10.1145/1979742.1979881 · DOI
- 10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01720.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s11606-015-3344-0 · DOI
- 10.1177/1541931214581088 · DOI
- 10.1145/2470654.2466230 · DOI
- 10.1145/1978942.1978948 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ramesh, S. H., Ouskine, A., Khorasani, E., Ebrahimipour, M., Finestone, H., Chan, A. D. C., & Rajabiyazdi, F. (2024) · Graphics Interface · doi:10.1145/3670947.3670978 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Solomon, J., Scherer, A. M., Exe, N. L., Witteman, H. O., Fagerlin, A., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Université Laval (CA)
- University of Utah (US)
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2016-05-07
- Pages
- 2314-2320
- OpenAlex
- W2346001114
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 6.03
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS021681)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Keywords
- patient communication, patient portals, graphical representation, user-centered design, health data visualization, contextual information, iterative design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
