Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Trial and Error and Algorithm01:12

Trial and Error and Algorithm

A problem-solving strategy is a plan of action used to find a solution. Different strategies have distinct action plans. Trial and error involves trying different solutions until one works. For instance, to fix a broken printer, you might check ink levels, ensure the paper tray isn't jammed, and verify the printer's connection to your laptop. This method can be time-consuming but is commonly used. Thomas Edison, for example, used trial and error to find a suitable filament for the light bulb,...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A Methodology for Creating Patient Relevant Questions Suitable for Evaluating AI Generated Health Advice.

Studies in health technology and informatics·2026
Same author

The Impact of Electronic Health Records on Family Physicians During Simulated Virtual Encounters: Exploratory Mixed Methods Study.

JMIR medical informatics·2026
Same author

Predicting Electronic Health Record Usability: Scoping Review of Adoption Models, Metrics, and Future Directions.

JMIR human factors·2026
Same author

Digital mental health needs a purpose-driven approach.

Nature human behaviour·2026
Same author

Patient, Family Caregiver and Health Care Provider Experiences With a Hospital at Home Program in British Columbia, Canada.

Quality management in health care·2026
Same author

Caregiver experiences of an integrative patient-centered digital health application for pediatric type 1 diabetes care: Findings from a pilot clinical trial.

PLOS digital health·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 31, 2026

Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality: A Neuro-Information-Systems Study
05:43

Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality: A Neuro-Information-Systems Study

Published on: November 30, 2022

Exploring the relationship between usability and technology-induced error: unraveling a complex interaction.

Andre Kushniruk1, Elizabeth Borycki

  • 1School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. andrek@uvic.ca

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
|June 21, 2011
PubMed
Summary

Evaluating health information systems requires robust methods to ensure usability and safety. This study presents a framework using usability engineering techniques for effective healthcare system evaluation.

More Related Videos

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios
06:02

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Published on: October 6, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 31, 2026

Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality: A Neuro-Information-Systems Study
05:43

Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality: A Neuro-Information-Systems Study

Published on: November 30, 2022

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios
06:02

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Published on: October 6, 2020

Area of Science:

  • Health Informatics
  • Usability Engineering
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • Evaluating health information systems (HIS) for usability and safety is a significant challenge.
  • Increasing complexity and distribution of HIS necessitate advanced evaluation methods.
  • Traditional methods may not adequately address the unique demands of healthcare environments.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present a methodological framework for evaluating the usability and safety of HIS.
  • To adapt and apply usability engineering methods in healthcare settings.
  • To provide feedback for improving HIS design and implementation.

Main Methods:

  • Application and adaptation of usability engineering methods.
  • Collaboration with hospitals and healthcare organizations.
  • In-situ testing in both simulated and real clinical settings.

Main Results:

  • A methodological framework for usability and safety evaluation of HIS was developed.
  • Usability evaluations were conducted in diverse healthcare environments.
  • The framework demonstrated effectiveness in assessing HIS usability and safety.

Conclusions:

  • Usability engineering methods are crucial for ensuring the safety of HIS.
  • In-situ testing provides valuable insights into HIS performance in clinical practice.
  • Continued development of usability evaluation methods is essential for advancing healthcare technology.