A dashboard improves data accessibility and workflow in overdose fatality review, indicating potential for enhanced efficiency.
BACKGROUND Overdose Fatality Review (OFR) is a public health process in which cases of fatal overdose are carefully reviewed to identify prevention strategies. Current OFR requires review of multiple unconnected data sources, which is a manually intensive process. OBJECTIVE We aimed to use human factors design principles to develop a comprehensive dashboard that could facilitate enhanced processes to support OFR. METHODS We first surveyed OFR leaders in Wisconsin using the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) and conducted semi-structured interviews to identify targets for workflow optimization. Next, we developed a prototype dashboard for evaluation using a synthetic dataset built with Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT-4). We subsequently performed iterative design sessions with heuristic evaluations, and end-user feedback on the final prototype was obtained via targeted surveys and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS The NASA-TLX revealed a moderately high mental workload with the current workflow. Interviews affirmed that technological challenges and reliance on manual processes were contributory. The prototype dashboard addressed these concerns by integrating multiple data sources to generate population-level visualizations and patient-level event timelines. End-users reported the potential for improved efficiency and data accessibility compared to antecedent processes. CONCLUSIONS OFR is a data-intensive process that traditionally demands substantial manual effort. The data dashboard offers an informatics-based approach to streamline data aggregation and presentation, potentially enhancing the efficiency of case reviews. Implementing a dashboard that consolidates and visualizes disparate data sources has the potential to alleviate the manual workload in overdose fatality review.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pisani et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: