Premium
An evaluation of the user‐friendliness of Bayesian forecasting programs in a clinical setting
Author(s) -
Kumar Alzana A.,
Burgard Marc,
Stacey Sonya,
Sandaradura Indy,
Lai Tony,
Coorey Christine,
Cincunegui Marisol,
Staatz Christine E.,
Hennig Stefanie
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
british journal of clinical pharmacology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.216
H-Index - 146
eISSN - 1365-2125
pISSN - 0306-5251
DOI - 10.1111/bcp.14066
Subject(s) - likert scale , test (biology) , medical education , usability , computer science , scale (ratio) , psychology , applied psychology , medicine , human–computer interaction , paleontology , developmental psychology , physics , quantum mechanics , biology
Aims To evaluate 3 Bayesian forecasting (BF) programs—TDMx, InsightRx and DoseMe—on their user‐friendliness and common liked and disliked features through a survey of hospital pharmacists. Methods Clinical pharmacists across 3 Australian hospitals that did not use a BF program were invited to a BF workshop and complete a survey on programs they trialled. Participants were given 4 case scenarios to work through and asked to complete a 5‐point Likert scale survey evaluating the program's user‐friendliness. Liked and disliked features of each program were ascertained through written responses to open‐ended questions. Survey results were compared using a χ 2 test of equal or given proportions to identify significant differences in response. Results Twenty‐seven pharmacists, from hospitals, participated. BF programs were rated overall as user‐friendly with 70%, 41% and 37% ( P = .02) of participants recording a Likert score of 4 or 5 for DoseMe, TDMx and InsightRx, respectively. Participants found it easy to access all required information to use the programs, understood dosing recommendations and visualisations given by each program, and thought programs supported decision‐making with >50% of participants scoring a 4 or 5 across the programs in these categories. Common liked features across all programs were the graphical displays and ease of data entry, while common disliked features were related to the units, layout and information display. Conclusion Although differences exist between programs, all 3 programs were most commonly rated as user‐friendly across all themes evaluated, which provides useful information for healthcare facilities wanting to implement a BF program.