24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

      To submit your manuscript, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      National Public Health Dashboards: Protocol for a Scoping Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of robust public health data systems and the potential utility of data dashboards for ensuring access to critical public health data for diverse groups of stakeholders and decision makers. As dashboards are becoming ubiquitous, it is imperative to consider how they may be best integrated with public health data systems and the decision-making routines of diverse audiences. However, additional progress on the continued development, improvement, and sustainability of these tools requires the integration and synthesis of a largely fragmented scholarship regarding the purpose, design principles and features, successful implementation, and decision-making supports provided by effective public health data dashboards across diverse users and applications.

          Objective

          This scoping review aims to provide a descriptive and thematic overview of national public health data dashboards including their purpose, intended audiences, health topics, design elements, impact, and underlying mechanisms of use and usefulness of these tools in decision-making processes. It seeks to identify gaps in the current literature on the topic and provide the first-of-its-kind systematic treatment of actionability as a critical design element of public health data dashboards.

          Methods

          The scoping review follows the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. The review considers English-language, peer-reviewed journal papers, conference proceedings, book chapters, and reports that describe the design, implementation, and evaluation of a public health dashboard published between 2000 and 2023. The search strategy covers scholarly databases (CINAHL, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science) and gray literature sources and uses snowballing techniques. An iterative process of testing for and improving intercoder reliability was implemented to ensure that coders are properly trained to screen documents according to the inclusion criteria prior to beginning the full review of relevant papers.

          Results

          The search process initially identified 2544 documents, including papers located via databases, gray literature searching, and snowballing. Following the removal of duplicate documents (n=1416), nonrelevant items (n=839), and items classified as literature reviews and background information (n=73), 216 documents met the inclusion criteria: US case studies (n=90) and non-US case studies (n=126). Data extraction will focus on key variables, including public health data characteristics; dashboard design elements and functionalities; intended users, usability, logistics, and operation; and indicators of usefulness and impact reported.

          Conclusions

          The scoping review will analyze the goals, design, use, usefulness, and impact of public health data dashboards. The review will also inform the continued development and improvement of these tools by analyzing and synthesizing current practices and lessons emerging from the literature on the topic and proposing a theory-grounded and evidence-informed framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating public health data dashboards.

          International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

          DERR1-10.2196/52843

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis

              Background Reporting standards, such as PRISMA aim to ensure that the methods and results of systematic reviews are described in sufficient detail to allow full transparency. Flow diagrams in evidence syntheses allow the reader to rapidly understand the core procedures used in a review and examine the attrition of irrelevant records throughout the review process. Recent research suggests that use of flow diagrams in systematic reviews is poor and of low quality and called for standardised templates to facilitate better reporting in flow diagrams. The increasing options for interactivity provided by the Internet gives us an opportunity to support easy‐to‐use evidence synthesis tools, and here we report on the development of a tool for the production of PRISMA 2020‐compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Methods and Findings We developed a free‐to‐use, Open Source R package and web‐based Shiny app to allow users to design PRISMA flow diagrams for their own systematic reviews. Our tool allows users to produce standardised visualisations that transparently document the methods and results of a systematic review process in a variety of formats. In addition, we provide the opportunity to produce interactive, web‐based flow diagrams (exported as HTML files), that allow readers to click on boxes of the diagram and navigate to further details on methods, results or data files. We provide an interactive example here; https://prisma-flowdiagram.github.io/ . Conclusions We have developed a user‐friendly tool for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams for users with coding experience and, importantly, for users without prior experience in coding by making use of Shiny ( https://estech.shinyapps.io/prisma_flowdiagram/ ). This free‐to‐use tool will make it easier to produce clear and PRISMA 2020‐compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Significantly, users can also produce interactive flow diagrams for the first time, allowing readers of their reviews to smoothly and swiftly explore and navigate to further details of the methods and results of a review. We believe this tool will increase use of PRISMA flow diagrams, improve the compliance and quality of flow diagrams, and facilitate strong science communication of the methods and results of systematic reviews by making use of interactivity. We encourage the systematic review community to make use of the tool, and provide feedback to streamline and improve their usability and efficiency.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Res Protoc
                ResProt
                JMIR Research Protocols
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1929-0748
                2024
                16 May 2024
                : 13
                : e52843
                Affiliations
                [1 ] School of Communication & Information Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ United States
                [2 ] School of Information Florida State University Tallahassee, FL United States
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Itzhak Yanovitzky itzhak@ 123456rutgers.edu
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6366-8006
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8814-863X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7799-1218
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0506-9037
                https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5414-0119
                https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6161-4115
                Article
                v13i1e52843
                10.2196/52843
                11140273
                38753428
                5b7016d9-1d40-453d-9bf5-cf343c44bcb9
                ©Itzhak Yanovitzky, Gretchen Stahlman, Justine Quow, Matthew Ackerman, Yehuda Perry, Miriam Kim. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 16.05.2024.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 18 September 2023
                : 7 February 2024
                : 13 February 2024
                : 19 February 2024
                Categories
                Protocol
                Protocol

                dashboard,scoping review,public health,design,development,implementation,evaluation,user need,protocol,data dashboards,audiences,audience,systematic treatment,public health data dashboards,prisma-scr,snowballing techniques,gray literature sources,evidence-informed framework,framework,covid-19,pandemic

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log