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.
UNASSIGNED: DERR1-10.2196/52843.

BACKGROUND: Public Health Dashboards (PHDs) facilitate the monitoring and prediction of disease outbreaks by continuously monitoring the health status of the community. This study aimed to identify design principles and determinants for developing public health surveillance dashboards.
METHODS: This scoping review is based on Arksey and O\'Malley\'s framework as included in JBI guidance. Four databases were used to review and present the proposed principles of designing PHDs: IEEE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. We considered articles published between January 1, 2010 and November 30, 2022. The final search of articles was done on November 30, 2022. Only articles in the English language were included. Qualitative synthesis and trend analysis were conducted.
RESULTS: Findings from sixty-seven articles out of 543 retrieved articles, which were eligible for analysis, indicate that most of the dashboards designed from 2020 onwards were at the national level for managing and monitoring COVID-19. Design principles for the public health dashboard were presented in five groups, i.e., considering aim and target users, appropriate content, interface, data analysis and presentation types, and infrastructure.
CONCLUSIONS: Effective and efficient use of dashboards in public health surveillance requires implementing design principles to improve the functionality of these systems in monitoring and decision-making. Considering user requirements, developing a robust infrastructure for improving data accessibility, developing, and applying Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for data processing and reporting purposes, and designing interactive and intuitive interfaces are key for successful design and development.

BACKGROUND: Information overflow, a common problem in the present clinical environment, can be mitigated by summarizing clinical data. Although there are several solutions for clinical summarization, there is a lack of a complete overview of the research relevant to this field.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify state-of-the-art solutions for clinical summarization, to analyze their capabilities, and to identify their properties.
METHODS: A scoping review of articles published between 2005 and 2022 was conducted. With a clinical focus, PubMed and Web of Science were queried to find an initial set of reports, later extended by articles found through a chain of citations. The included reports were analyzed to answer the questions of where, what, and how medical information is summarized; whether summarization conserves temporality, uncertainty, and medical pertinence; and how the propositions are evaluated and deployed. To answer how information is summarized, methods were compared through a new framework \"collect-synthesize-communicate\" referring to information gathering from data, its synthesis, and communication to the end user.
RESULTS: Overall, 128 articles were included, representing various medical fields. Exclusively structured data were used as input in 46.1% (59/128) of papers, text in 41.4% (53/128) of articles, and both in 10.2% (13/128) of papers. Using the proposed framework, 42.2% (54/128) of the records contributed to information collection, 27.3% (35/128) contributed to information synthesis, and 46.1% (59/128) presented solutions for summary communication. Numerous summarization approaches have been presented, including extractive (n=13) and abstractive summarization (n=19); topic modeling (n=5); summary specification (n=11); concept and relation extraction (n=30); visual design considerations (n=59); and complete pipelines (n=7) using information extraction, synthesis, and communication. Graphical displays (n=53), short texts (n=41), static reports (n=7), and problem-oriented views (n=7) were the most common types in terms of summary communication. Although temporality and uncertainty information were usually not conserved in most studies (74/128, 57.8% and 113/128, 88.3%, respectively), some studies presented solutions to treat this information. Overall, 115 (89.8%) articles showed results of an evaluation, and methods included evaluations with human participants (median 15, IQR 24 participants): measurements in experiments with human participants (n=31), real situations (n=8), and usability studies (n=28). Methods without human involvement included intrinsic evaluation (n=24), performance on a proxy (n=10), or domain-specific tasks (n=11). Overall, 11 (8.6%) reports described a system deployed in clinical settings.
CONCLUSIONS: The scientific literature contains many propositions for summarizing patient information but reports very few comparisons of these proposals. This work proposes to compare these algorithms through how they conserve essential aspects of clinical information and through the \"collect-synthesize-communicate\" framework. We found that current propositions usually address these 3 steps only partially. Moreover, they conserve and use temporality, uncertainty, and pertinent medical aspects to varying extents, and solutions are often preliminary.

This scoping review summarizes the extent and characteristics of the published literature describing digital population management dashboards implemented to improve the quality of anticoagulant management. A standardized search protocol was executed to identify relevant manuscripts published between January 1, 2015 and May 31, 2022. The resulting records were systematically evaluated by multiple blinded reviewers and the findings from selected papers were evaluated and summarized. Twelve manuscripts were identified, originating from 5 organizations within the US and 2 from other countries. The majority (75%) described implementation in the outpatient setting. The identified papers described a variety of positive results of dashboard use, including a 24.5% reduction of questionable direct oral anticoagulant dosing in one organization, a 33.3% relative improvement in no-show appointments in an ambulatory care clinic, and a 75% improvement in intervention efficiency. One medical center achieved a 98.4% risk-appropriate venous thromboembolism risk prophylaxis prescribing rate and 40.6% reduction in anticoagulation-related adverse event rates. The manuscripts primarily described retrospective findings from single-center dashboard implementation experiences. Digital dashboards have been successfully implemented to support the anticoagulation of acute and ambulatory patients and available manuscripts suggest a positive impact on care-related processes and relevant patient outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to better characterize the implementation and impact of dashboards for anticoagulation management. Published reports suggest that digital dashboards may improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of anticoagulation management. Additional research is needed to validate these findings and to understand how best to implement these tools.

BACKGROUND: The use of clinical dashboards in aged care systems to support performance review and improve outcomes for older adults receiving care is increasing.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to explore evidence from studies of the acceptability and usability of clinical dashboards including their visual features and functionalities in aged care settings.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using 5 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) from inception to April 2022. Studies were included in the review if they were conducted in aged care environments (home-based community care, retirement villages, and long-term care) and reported a usability or acceptability evaluation of a clinical dashboard for use in aged care environments, including specific dashboard visual features (eg, a qualitative summary of individual user experience or metrics from a usability scale). Two researchers independently reviewed the articles and extracted the data. Data synthesis was performed via narrative review, and the risk of bias was measured using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS: In total, 14 articles reporting on 12 dashboards were included. The quality of the articles varied. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting (home care 8/14, 57%), dashboard user groups (health professionals 9/14, 64%), and sample size (range 3-292). Dashboard features included a visual representation of information (eg, medical condition prevalence), analytic capability (eg, predictive), and others (eg, stakeholder communication). Dashboard usability was mixed (4 dashboards rated as high), and dashboard acceptability was high for 9 dashboards. Most users considered dashboards to be informative, relevant, and functional, highlighting the use and intention of using this resource in the future. Dashboards that had the presence of one or more of these features (bar charts, radio buttons, checkboxes or other symbols, interactive displays, and reporting capabilities) were found to be highly acceptable.
CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive summary of clinical dashboards used in aged care is provided to inform future dashboard development, testing, and implementation. Further research is required to optimize visualization features, usability, and acceptability of dashboards in aged care.

Public health is not only threatened by diseases, pandemics, or epidemics. It is also challenged by deficits in the communication of health information. The current COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that impressively. One way to deliver scientific data such as epidemiological findings and forecasts on disease spread are dashboards. Considering the current relevance of dashboards for public risk and crisis communication, this systematic review examines the state of research on dashboards in the context of public health risks and diseases.
Nine electronic databases where searched for peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings. Included articles (n = 65) were screened and assessed by three independent reviewers. Through a methodological informed differentiation between descriptive studies and user studies, the review also assessed the quality of included user studies (n = 18) by use of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).
65 articles were assessed in regards to the public health issues addressed by the respective dashboards, as well as the data sources, functions and information visualizations employed by the different dashboards. Furthermore, the literature review sheds light on public health challenges and objectives and analyzes the extent to which user needs play a role in the development and evaluation of a dashboard. Overall, the literature review shows that studies that do not only describe the construction of a specific dashboard, but also evaluate its content in terms of different risk communication models or constructs (e.g., risk perception or health literacy) are comparatively rare. Furthermore, while some of the studies evaluate usability and corresponding metrics from the perspective of potential users, many of the studies are limited to a purely functionalistic evaluation of the dashboard by the respective development teams.
The results suggest that applied research on public health intervention tools like dashboards would gain in complexity through a theory-based integration of user-specific risk information needs.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=200178, identifier: CRD42020200178.

UNASSIGNED: The use of information-based solutions such as dashboards is on the rise for taking fact-based actions against the COVID-19 crisis. This scoping review aimed to comprehensively investigate COVID-19 dashboards from different technical perspectives.
UNASSIGNED: Three main bibliographic databases, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, were searched on 28 August 2021 to retrieve relevant studies. Arksey and O\'Malley\'s (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19-32, 2005) methodological framework and the enhanced version of this methodology developed by Levac et al. (Implement Sci 5(1):1-9, 2010) were adopted for conducting this review.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 26 articles were included. The COVID-19 dashboards mainly focused on the infected (n = 25), deceased (n = 17), and recovered cases (n = 13), as well as the performed test (n = 10). Most of the dashboards were interactive, with public accessibility targeting various user groups. While some dashboards were both informative and supportive (38%), most were mainly informative (92%). The dashboard data were generally analyzed using simple techniques (58%) and delivered through web-based applications (88%).
UNASSIGNED: Dashboards can help immediately manage, analyze, and summarize a huge amount of information about a COVID-19 outbreak. The findings revealed that the developed COVID-19 dashboards share more or less analogous characteristics that could lay the groundwork for designing and developing dashboards for any other pandemic.

Governments and healthcare organisations collect data on antibiotic prescribing (AP) for surveillance. This data can support tools for visualisations and feedback to GPs using dashboards that may prompt a change in prescribing behaviour. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of interactive dashboards to optimise AP in primary care. Six electronic databases were searched for relevant studies up to August 2022. A narrative synthesis of findings was conducted to evaluate the intervention processes and results. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance, risk of bias and quality of the evidence. A total of ten studies were included (eight RCTs and two non-RCTs). Overall, seven studies showed a slight reduction in AP. However, this reduction in AP when offering a dashboard may not in itself result in reductions but only when combined with educational components, public commitment or behavioural strategies. Only one study recorded dashboard engagement and showed a difference of 10% (95% CI 5% to 15%) between intervention and control. None of the studies reported on the development, pilot or implementation of dashboards or the involvement of stakeholders in design and testing. Interactive dashboards may reduce AP in primary care but most likely only when combined with other educational or behavioural intervention strategies.

Today, the use of data in administrative and clinical processes is quite challenging due to the large volume of data, data collection from various sources, and lack of data structure. As a data management tool, dashboards play an important role in timely visual display of critical information on key performances.
This systematic review aimed to identify functional and non-functional requirements, as well as challenges of using dashboards in hospitals.
In this systematic review, four databases, including the Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus, were searched to find relevant articles from 2000 until May 30, 2020. The final search was conducted on May 30, 2020. Data collection was performed using a data extraction form and reviewing the content of relevant studies on the potentials and challenges of dashboard implementation.
Fifty-four out of 1254 retrieved articles were selected for this study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The functional requirements for dashboards included reporting, reminders, customization, tracking, alert creation, and assessment of performance indicators. On the other hand, the non-functional requirements included the dashboard speed, security, ease of use, installation on different devices (e.g., PCs and laptops), integration with other systems, web-based design, inclusion of a data warehouse, being up-to-data, and use of data visualization elements based on the user\'s needs. Moreover, the identified challenges were categorized into four groups: data sources, dashboard content, dashboard design, implementation, and integration in other systems at the hospital level.
Dashboards, by providing information in an appropriate manner, can lead to the proper use of information by users. In order for a dashboard to be effective in clinical and managerial processes, particular attention must be paid to its capabilities, and the challenges of its implementation need to be addressed.

BACKGROUND: Clinical dashboards used as audit and feedback (A&F) or clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are increasingly adopted in healthcare. However, their effectiveness in changing the behavior of clinicians or patients is still unclear. This systematic review aims to investigate the effectiveness of clinical dashboards used as CDSS or A&F tools (as a standalone intervention or part of a multifaceted intervention) in primary care or hospital settings on medication prescription/adherence and test ordering.
METHODS: Seven major databases were searched for relevant studies, from inception to August 2021. Two authors independently extracted data, assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB II scale, and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Data on trial characteristics and intervention effect sizes were extracted. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarize the findings of the included trials.
RESULTS: Eleven randomized trials were included. Eight trials evaluated clinical dashboards as standalone interventions and provided conflicting evidence on changes in antibiotic prescribing and no effects on statin prescribing compared to usual care. Dashboards increased medication adherence in patients with inflammatory arthritis but not in kidney transplant recipients. Three trials investigated dashboards as part of multicomponent interventions revealing decreased use of opioids for low back pain, increased proportion of patients receiving cardiovascular risk screening, and reduced antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections.
CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence that dashboards integrated into electronic medical record systems and used as feedback or decision support tools may be associated with improvements in medication use and test ordering.