Erica Barbazza1, Damir Ivanković1, Sophie Wang2,3, Kendall Jamieson Gilmore4, Mircha Poldrugovac1, Claire Willmington4, Nicolas Larrain2,3, Véronique Bos1, Sara Allin5, Niek Klazinga1, Dionne Kringos1. 1. Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, NL. 2. OptiMedis AG, Hamburg, DE. 3. Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, DE. 4. Laboratorio Management e Sanità, Institute of Management and Department EMbeDS, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, IT. 5. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Public, web-based COVID-19 dashboards are in use worldwide to communicate pandemic-related information. Actionability of dashboards-as a predictor of their potential use for data-driven decision-making-was assessed in a global study during the early stages of the pandemic. It revealed a widespread lack of features needed to support actionability. In view of the inherently dynamic nature of dashboards and their unprecedented speed of creation, the evolution of the dashboards and changes to their actionability merits exploration. OBJECTIVE: To explore how COVID-19 dashboards evolved in the Canadian context during 2020 and whether the presence of actionability features changed over time. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive assessment of a pan-Canadian sample of COVID-19 dashboards (N=26), followed by an appraisal of changes to their actionability by a panel of expert scorers (N=8). Scorers assessed the dashboards at two points in time, July and November 2020, using an assessment tool informed by communication theory and health care performance intelligence. Applying the nominal group technique, scorers were grouped in panels of three, and evaluated the presence of the seven defined features of highly actionable dashboards at each time point. RESULTS: Improvements had been made to the dashboards over time. These predominantly involved data provision (specificity of geographic breakdowns, range of indicators reported, explanations of data sources or calculations) and advancements enabled by the technologies employed (customization of time trends, interactive or visual chart elements). Further improvements in actionability were noted especially in features involving local-level data provision, time-trend reporting, and indicator management. No improvements were found in communicative elements (clarity of purpose and audience), while the use of storytelling techniques to narrate trends remained largely absent from the dashboards. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements to COVID-19 dashboards in the Canadian context during 2020 were seen mostly in data availability and dashboard technology. Further improving the actionability of dashboards for public reporting will require attention to both technical and organizational aspects of dashboard development. Such efforts would include better skill-mixing across disciplines, continued investment in data standards, and clearer mandates for their developers to ensure accountability and the development of purpose-driven dashboards.
BACKGROUND: Public, web-based COVID-19 dashboards are in use worldwide to communicate pandemic-related information. Actionability of dashboards-as a predictor of their potential use for data-driven decision-making-was assessed in a global study during the early stages of the pandemic. It revealed a widespread lack of features needed to support actionability. In view of the inherently dynamic nature of dashboards and their unprecedented speed of creation, the evolution of the dashboards and changes to their actionability merits exploration. OBJECTIVE: To explore how COVID-19 dashboards evolved in the Canadian context during 2020 and whether the presence of actionability features changed over time. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive assessment of a pan-Canadian sample of COVID-19 dashboards (N=26), followed by an appraisal of changes to their actionability by a panel of expert scorers (N=8). Scorers assessed the dashboards at two points in time, July and November 2020, using an assessment tool informed by communication theory and health care performance intelligence. Applying the nominal group technique, scorers were grouped in panels of three, and evaluated the presence of the seven defined features of highly actionable dashboards at each time point. RESULTS: Improvements had been made to the dashboards over time. These predominantly involved data provision (specificity of geographic breakdowns, range of indicators reported, explanations of data sources or calculations) and advancements enabled by the technologies employed (customization of time trends, interactive or visual chart elements). Further improvements in actionability were noted especially in features involving local-level data provision, time-trend reporting, and indicator management. No improvements were found in communicative elements (clarity of purpose and audience), while the use of storytelling techniques to narrate trends remained largely absent from the dashboards. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements to COVID-19 dashboards in the Canadian context during 2020 were seen mostly in data availability and dashboard technology. Further improving the actionability of dashboards for public reporting will require attention to both technical and organizational aspects of dashboard development. Such efforts would include better skill-mixing across disciplines, continued investment in data standards, and clearer mandates for their developers to ensure accountability and the development of purpose-driven dashboards.
Authors: Eliya Farah; Maria El Bizri; Radmila Day; Lavina Matai; Fred Horne; Timothy P Hanna; David Armstrong; Susan Marlin; Olivier Jérôme; Darren R Brenner; Winson Cheung; Laszlo Radvanyi; Eva Villalba; Natalie Leon; Chana Cohen; Karine Chalifour; Ronald Burkes; Sharlene Gill; Scott Berry; Brandon S Sheffield; Pamela Fralick; Barry D Stein Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 3.677