SEER*DMS Usability Evaluation

Transcription

1 SEER*DMS Usability Evaluation Marina Matatova Surveillance Informatics Branch Surveillance Research Program June 20 th 2017

2 Future of Cancer Surveillance How do we move towards precision cancer surveillance? Volume Increasing Volume of SEER data through implementation of new automated data acquisition and processing approaches, such as Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques for data extraction Variety Increasing Variety of SEER data through strategic partnerships with research and industry partners in our Data Acquisition and Linkages initiatives Quality Increasing Quality of SEER data through a strategic program level Data Quality Plan and ongoing Data Quality Audit projects 2

3 Initial requirements gathering for SEER*DMS Detroit Connecticut New Mexico, Hawaii Iowa, Cherokee Nation, Alaska Louisiana Seattle Utah Georgia New Jersey New York *Non-SEER Registry Minnesota *Non-SEER Registry SEER*DMS SEER*DMS has supported cancer registry operations for more than a decade. Auto-linking Consolidation Quality Edits Reporting 3

4 Considerations & Challenges How do we ensure existing registry operations continue to be supported in SEER*DMS? How do we build in new technologies and processes into SEER*DMS in a scalable way? How do we ensure that SEER*DMS is positioned optimally to support the evolving needs of both the registries and the SEER program? 4

5 SEER*DMS Review In , SEER program initiated an external expert review of SEER*DMS A team of health informatics experts led by Dr. Paul Fearn were contracted to perform the review and provide recommendations for enhancements. 9 key sections of recommendations were delivered in a final report to NCI Analysis Prioritized Enhancement Integrated Recommendations: to and development Tools in SEER*DMS of SEER*DMS Governance Automation Architecture, and Communication Processes and NLP Report Performance Writer, and Case Security Uploader Usability Assessment Planning Requirements Design Implementation Evaluation Testing Source: Friedman, C. and Wyatt, J. Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics 5

6 What is a Human Factors approach? Usability Approach The complexity Ergonomics of cancer (or human registry factors) operations is the scientific requires discipline that we concerned go beyond the commonly evaluated user interface. with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies Surveillance Research Program (SRP) is analyzing various levels of usability theory, methodologies principles, data to ensure and methods that the to design assessment in order targets to optimize (1) stakeholders human well-being impacted by and SEER*DMS overall system (2) registry performance. users of - SEER*DMS International and (3) Ergonomics user context Association (IEA) Council This requires utilizing a human factors approach to our evaluations 6

7 High-level goals 1. Develop a usability framework that can target SEER program objectives and cancer registry needs by applying human factor methodologies that take into consideration Users User Environment Interface/System 2. In addition, SRP is looking to develop an ongoing iterative usability process that can be incorporated into other SEER technical project implementations 7

8 Current Status/FuturePlans In Progress Usability Evaluation Current Status and Future Plans Ongoing Usability Testing 8

9 Projected Impact How will the usability initiatives impact SEER*DMS and the Registries? Improved workflow in SEER*DMS to better support registry processes including reduced time and effort for manual processes Improved SEER*DMS functionalities and user interfaces Quicker identification of future modules, functionalities, and user interface changes in response to continually evolving registry and SEER program needs 9

10 Acknowledgments Surveillance Research Program Lynne Penberthy, MD,MPH Kathy Cronin, PhD Eric Durbin, DrPH SEER*DMS Review Informatics Team Frank Manion, MS Paul Fearn, PhD, MBA Carol Kosary, DMgt Gary Levin Patrick Mergler, MBA Thank You SEER*DMS Review Participating SEER Registries Information Management Systems, Inc. (IMS) Iowa Louisiana Linda Coyle Dave Annett Georgia Seattle Chuck May Scott Depuy

11