HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide

HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide

HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Description

In this course, learners apply principles of human factors engineering to the design of optimal user interfaces that improve clinical processes. Learners examine clinical decision support and clinical workflow analysis, modeling, reducing data entry errors, and usability testing in efforts to improve the experience of end users while prioritizing patient safety and the delivery of quality health care.

HCI 670 (User Interface Design for Informatics) Complete Course Syllabus— Topic 1 till 8 — Assignments & Discussion Questions

• HCI 670 Topic 1 Assignment Human Factors Engineering Paper
• HCI 670 Topic 1 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 1 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 2 Assignment Clinical Decision Support
• HCI 670 Topic 2 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 2 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 3 Assignment Needs Assessment Case Study
• HCI 670 Topic 3 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 3 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 4 Assignment: Designing Electronic Forms
• HCI 670 Topic 4 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 4 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 5 Assignment: Benchmark — Create a Workflow
• HCI 670 Topic 5 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 5 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 6 Assignment Benchmark — User Testing Script
• HCI 670 Topic 6 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 6 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 7 Assignment Workflow Training
• HCI 670 Topic 7 Discussion Question 1
• HCI 670 Topic 7 Discussion Question 2
• HCI 670 Topic 8 Assignment Benchmark — Internal Presentation
• HCI 670 Topic 8 Discussion Question 1

HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Assignments & Discussions

HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Discussions

HCI 670 Topic 1 DQ 1: 

Describe the benefits of a clinical workflow and explain how an EHR-related workflow applies to informatics.

HCI 670 Topic 1 DQ 2: 

What are the possible solutions to prevent data entry error? How does this relate to overall integrity of the database and the analytic process?

HCI 670 Topic 2 DQ 1: 

Provide an example of an EHR-based clinical decision support tool from a workplace experience or current online resource. Describe the impact of decision support tool on the quality of patient care.

HCI 670 Topic 2 DQ 2: 

Discuss design principles used to facilitate heuristics in a clinical decision support process. Provide a workplace example and offer suggestions to improve the clinical decision support? Provide a rationale for why you made those suggestions.

HCI 670 Topic 3 DQ 1: 

Define “need assessment” and explain the various types of need assessments. Provide a workplace example of an improvement opportunity and identify the methods of needs assessment that could be used in this situation.

For top-quality coursework writing help and assignment writing services, trust Reliable Papers. Our expert team delivers 100% original human-written work tailored to your needs. Contact us via phone, WhatsApp, or live chat for assistance today!

HCI 670 Topic 3 DQ 2: 

Patient safety is a major concern for the health care industry. Refer to the topic resources to discuss how this concern may be addressed during the EHR needs assessment.

HCI 670 Topic 4 DQ 1: 

Consider the concept of data governance. Discuss the important strategies required for a data governance program.

HCI 670 Topic 4 DQ 2: 

Discuss how you would use data to develop information, knowledge and wisdom in workplace.

HCI 670 Topic 5 DQ 1: 

What are the benefits of a workflow analysis? What are some of the questions that need to be addressed when doing a workflow analysis?

HCI 670 Topic 5 DQ 2: 

Provide an example of something that was implemented and went poorly because workflow analysis was not done. Describe why it failed and what happened as a result.

HCI 670 Topic 6 DQ 1: 

Explain at least two different types of user testing, their importance and provide an example.

HCI 670 Topic 6 DQ 2: 

Refer to the assigned reading, “Exploratory Testing vs Scripted Testing — A Quick Guide,” to discuss in which step of the user testing process the most crucial bugs are identified.

HCI 670 Topic 7 DQ 1: 

Describe your principles of adult learning and their application to end user training. Provide an example of a training you have attended and how adult learning principles were utilized.

HCI 670 Topic 7 DQ 2: 

Discuss how organizational culture impacts the success of system implementation. Identify strategic change initiative success factors and discuss how these factors impact successful system implementation.

HCI 670 Topic 8 DQ 1: 

Changing health information systems can have a direct impact on the quality of patient care. Discuss initiatives that can enhance patient care quality during advanced stages of EHR adaption. Refer to the topic resources for help answering this question.

You can also read another study guide on nursing assignments for students from another post on PUB-540 Principles of Epidemiology Course Assignments & Discussions.

HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Assignments

HCI 670 Topic 1 Assignment — Human Factors Engineering Paper

Assignment

Human Factors Engineering Paper

The purpose of this assignment is to explain the principles of design usability and analyze the impact of human factors on electronic applications for health care systems.

Write a 750-1,000-word paper on the usability of health informatics applications. Include the following:

1. Describe an example of an electronic health record (EHR) application used in a health care setting.
2. Describe the key elements of design usability for that application.
3. Analyze and describe how human factors or heuristic principles affect the electronic EHR in the chosen application.
4. Recommend an improvement to the chosen electronic application.
5. Provide a rationale for the suggested improvement based on knowledge of design usability.

Support your findings with a minimum of two scholarly resources.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. 

Rubric

 

 

 

HCI 670 Topic 2 Assignment — Clinical Decision Support

Assignment

Clinical Decision Support

Clinical decision support is about using the right trigger, to the right person, with the right instructions, with the intent to ensure that the person is making the right decision.

The purpose of this assignment is to describe the different types of clinical decision support and determine the outcomes of applied clinical decision support.

Using the topic resources and your own research, write a 500-750-word paper addressing the following:

1. What are the different types of clinical decision support?
2. Describe at least three different types of clinical decision support that could be used in a health care setting or provide a personal workplace example.
3. Using the examples, you have provided (above), identify the triggers that would initiate the criteria for clinical decision support.
4. Using the same examples, outline the who, what, when, and how instructions of a clinical decision support enhancement.
5. Describe the outcomes of the clinical decision support application.

Cite at least two scholarly resources in your response.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. 

Rubric

 

HCI 670 Topic 3 Assignment — Needs Assessment Case Study

Description

The purpose of this assignment is to identify and analyze the needs of an EHR in a clinical setting in order to determine a potential solution to an EHR problem.

Read the “Integrated Case Study”, “Oncology North: Navigator Intake Paper Form” and “Oncology South: Oncology Navigator Intake Form” resources prior to beginning the assignment and use the information in the resource to write a 750-1,000 word paper that provides answers to the following questions:

1. What are the problems identified in the EHR?
2. What are the gaps resulting from the identified problems?
3. What are some opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR?
4. What developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting?
5. What is a potential solution to the identified EHR problem?

Cite at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed resources in your analysis.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Integrated Case Study

Overview:

Throughout this course, you will use this case study to demonstrate knowledge of the following course content:

• Clinical decision support
• Assessing user needs
• Analyzing and documenting workflow
• Designing and customizing fields, forms, and templates
• User testing
• Evaluation metrics
• Designing user documentation and training

In a series of assignments, you will use this case study to integrate user interface design (including usability/human factor principles) into a design document, analyze and develop workflows, evaluate users’ needs (including their involvement in user testing), develop evaluation metrics, and design enduser training materials.

The case study, which will be used throughout the course, will focus on various components of the course topics. It focuses specifically on the unique needs of oncology patients and the healthcare needs of oncology navigators and prior authorization/financial coordinators.

The Case:

Universal Health is a large not-for-profit health care system with 12 hospitals in threestates and two large oncology programs in Arizona. One of the oncology programs is affiliated with Academic Hospital and the other with a larger national oncology healthcare system. Although both oncology locations are part of Universal Health, there are significant differences in how each of thelocations operates due to a recent merger/acquisition of the Academic Hospital oncology program (Oncology South) and the affiliation of the other oncology program (Oncology North) with a national oncology health care system. To compound these operational issues, Oncology North had been part of Universal Health for 8 years, so its Electronic Health Record (EHR) wasChrystal, which was the EHR platform for Universal Health and became the model used to convert Oncology South off itsEHR to align with the rest of the organization. Management of oncology patients is quite complex and there was significant concern from Oncology South aboutthe EHR conversion, as well as changes that would affectitsoperating model. Previously,both oncology programs worked relatively independently with IT to create custom solutions, but now would need to work together to create a standardized oncology solution for Universal Health.

If a merger/acquisition of a large academic hospital and its oncology program wasnot complex enough, adding the conversion of an EHR certainly made the situation more difficult. Also compounding the issue, Oncology North—although it had been on the EHR Chrystal for almost 8 years—had significant issues with the current build and felt that there were several gaps related to functionality for oncology clinicians to service itsunique population. Since Universal Health was in the process of converting the EHR at Academic Hospital and Oncology program, the EHR vendor, Chrystal, was actively involving itsalignment specialiststo assist in the conversion. One of the keyfirst steps of the Chrystal alignment specialists was to do a gap analysis and prioritization of EHR functionality for oncology as well as throughout Universal Health.

The gap analysis done by Chrystal found that the oncology build for Universal Health overall did not align to itsrecommendation for oncology specialties in several areas within the EHR. As a result, a focused team (including a project manager,nursing informatics, Universal Health IT resources, Chrystal oncology alignment specialists, and Chrystal oncology IT experts) was created to systematically address the recommendations from the Chrystal oncology gap analysis. Although there were recommendations globally related to Universal Health’s overall EHR build, there were some specific recommendations related to the build of the oncology platform within Chrystal. Some of the initial focus was related to concerns related to prior authorization/financial gaps and the functionally/workflow of all the oncology providers/clinicians,but also the oncology navigators whoreally didnot have any oncology functionality within Chrystal.

Servicing an oncology population is a significant part of the patient demographics of anylarge health care organization.Oncology patients have unique needs due to the frequency of their visits and the length of their treatments and follow-up, which can last a lifetime. A cancer diagnosis is life changing and can cause great emotional, physical, and financial stress. Oncology navigators exist to assess and assist patients and their families during their cancer treatment and hopefully into remission/survivorship. Unfortunately, cancer treatment can be costly, and dealing with insurance companies for prior authorization is an unfortunate reality in the current health care system. For health care providers, there is great financial responsibility in providing cancer treatment, so obtaining authorization from insurance companies and ensuring that patients are aware of their own financial responsibility areessential for both the patient and the organization.

After a patient receives a cancer diagnosis, the next step is usually a referral to an oncology specialist/program like Oncology North or Oncology South. That referral can come from a patient calling an oncology specialist/program directly or from the diagnosing physician contactingan oncology specialist/program. Oncology South and Oncology North both have dedicated intake referral specialists who work directly with patients, families,and referring physicians to get patients scheduled with anoncology specialist basedon their diagnosis. Before the patient sees the oncology specialist for the first time, many documents need to be sent to the prior authorization team for review to ensure that the appropriate prior authorization is obtained from the insurance company, as well as making sure that the patient will be seen by the most appropriate oncology specialist for the specifically diagnosed cancer. These documents vary from pathology reports, diagnostic results, and referring physician notes that can be sent to the prior authorization specialist at different times for different patients. It is essential to have a standard workflow and expectation of standard documentation in a certain place in the EHR, so that everyone involved in the initial authorization and clinical care knows what steps have been takenand what actions arepending. While these financial steps are occurring behind the scenes and are important details that need to be secured before a patient’s first appointment, it is worth noting that at this juncture patients have just received some of the worst news in their life and they just want to get treatment as soon as possible.

Oncology navigators are nurses that specialize in assisting patients navigate their cancer journey from diagnosis through treatment and into survivorship. After the first contact with the oncology intake specialists, oncology navigators are the next foundational step in the patient’s journey towards treatment and recovery. After the initial documentation is completed by the intake specialist who provides some basic information, including name of person calling, contact information, referral sources, provider information, and diagnosis information,such astype of cancer.  Based upon the type of cancer on the intake documentation, an oncology navigator who specializes in that cancer type is notified of the new patient and contacts the patient to initiate acustom navigation plan based upon assessment of needs. The oncology navigator role is an extremely important part of the oncology team. However, oncology navigatorswere identified as being significantly underdeveloped within Universal Health EHR based upon Chrystal’s gap analysis, so there needed to be focused attention on this group within the organization.

As a result, a dedicated team needed to be formed to include individuals from nursing informatics from Universal Health, Chrystal oncology alignment and IT specialists, Chrystal IT staff, and oncology navigators from both Oncology North and Oncology South. This team would be responsible documenting workflow, assessing enduser needs, and submitting a final design recommendation (including training materials) to the Universal Health IT build team. The completion deadline for the design document is 8 weeks.

Assessing current state and understanding end user needs must be one of the first goals of this dedicated team. Two days were dedicated for onsite observations of oncology navigators at Oncology South and Oncology North, during which it was discovered from the observations that even though the oncology navigators at both locations performedthe same role, they had some significant differences that needed to be overcome to be able to collaborate and create a single oncology navigator solution. The grid below outlines some of the differences.

Operations Differences	Oncology South	Oncology North
Initial Contact With Patient	Phone interview within 3 days	Initial physician clinic visit
Patient Oversight	All oncology patients	Only oncology patients that have identified needs
Documentation	Paper form: See document: Nav Assessment 2018	Paper form: See document: Oncology North

Although each location has operational differences, they alsohave several similarities in how they used some of the tools in the EHR, as well as their need for data and the ability to track/trend the outcomes of their patients. One key request was to make it easier for all oncology clinicians to be able to see their documentation within Chrystal. These foundational similarities aligned to what Chrystal oncology specialists had implemented at other institutions, having already created an Oncology Navigator Recommended Design Document that could be used at UniversalHealth. The table below provides some similarities between Oncology North and Oncology South.

Operations Similarities	Oncology North and Oncology South
Position	Navigator/Coordinator RN
Data Request	Wanted discrete data for reports
Electronic Documentation	Used same two electronic methods to chart: Electronic forms shared by all types of navigators (e.g., ortho, pulmonary) Free-text note also shared by same navigators above
Electronic Documentation	Wanted it to be easier to find specific oncology navigator documentation

Healthcare is all about data.In addition to using EHR for recording documentation, it is used to extract data to evaluate outcomes. Data in the EHR can come from discrete data from ICD10/ICD9 used by providers/coders, SNOMED, IMO codes used clinicians, but also directly from forms and flowsheets from discrete data fields. Understanding the unique data requirements of the oncology navigators, as well the initial prior authorization team, is foundational to creating the appropriate discrete fields or using existing data fields like ICD10 to help sort and organize data.

HCI 670 Topic 3 Assignment — Needs Assessment Case Study Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HCI-670	HCI-670-O500	Needs Assessment Case Study	75.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)	3: Satisfactory (79.00%)	4: Good (87.00%)	5: Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Identified Problems	10.0%	A description of the identified problem is not present.	A description of the identified problem is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the identified problem is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the identified problem is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the identified problem in the EHR is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Gaps	15.0%	A description of the gaps resulting from the identified problem is not present.	A description of the gaps resulting from the identified problem is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the gaps resulting from the identified problem is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the gaps resulting from the identified problem is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the gaps resulting from the identified problem is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Opportunities	15.0%	An explanation of the opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR is not present.	An explanation of the opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the opportunities to expand or develop the capabilities of the EHR is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Developments to Clinical Workflow	15.0%	A description of the developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting is not present.	A description of the developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the developments could be made to the clinical workflow setting is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Potential Solution	15.0%	A description of the potential solution to the identified EHR problem is not present.	A description of the potential solution to the identified EHR problem is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the potential solution to the identified EHR problem is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the potential solution to the identified EHR problem is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the potential solution to the identified EHR problem is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

 

HCI 670 Topic 4 Assignment — Digital Electronic Forms

Assignment

Designing Electronic Forms

The purpose of this assignment is to design a clinical form to be used for oncology RN navigators.

Read the “Integrated Case Study” resource and review the “Oncology North: Navigator Intake Paper Form” and “Oncology South: Oncology Navigator Intake Form” prior to beginning the assignment.

Based upon the case study and two intake forms, use an Excel spreadsheet or Word document to design a custom form that merges the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form. Be sure to include the different custom fields and topics necessary for navigating the form.

Along with your form, include a 250-word rationale in which you:

1. Describe the heuristic principles used to design the clinical form.
2. Explain how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care.
3. Explain the rationale of the design.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

HCI 670 Topic 4 Assignment — Digital Electronic Forms Rubric

HCI 670 Topic 5 Assignment Benchmark — Create a Workflow

Description

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze a clinical workflow and apply process modeling techniques to solve an EMR problem.

Read the “Integrated Case Study” resource and review the “Oncology North: Navigator Intake Paper Form” and “Oncology South: Oncology Navigator Intake Form” prior to beginning the assignment. In addition, refer to the instructor feedback you received on the Topic 3 assignment.

Part 1: Analyze a Current State

Analyze the “Oncology North: Navigator Intake Paper Form” and “Oncology South: Oncology Navigator Intake Form” to identify opportunities for process improvement as they relate to informatics. Consider ways to optimize electronic documentation and reduce the number of steps.

Part 2: Create a Future State Workflow

Using an Excel spreadsheet or Word document, create a future state workflow that solves the identified improvement opportunities from your analysis with a minimum of six steps and a clearly defined start and stop. The workflow must display the accurate symbols used to indicate certain actions.

Part 3: Rationale

In addition, support the future state workflow with a 500-word rationale that provides the following:

1. Identify the users of the workflow.
2. Describe the identified opportunities for process improvement and how the future state workflow addresses these opportunities.
3. Describe how the future state workflow optimizes electronic documentation and reduces the number of steps.
4. Explain the effects of the future state workflow on patient care.
5. Explain how the future state workflow will change based on user needs.
6. Discuss how to develop an improvement plan to enhance the future state workflow.

Include three to five scholarly resources to support your findings.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Make sure to divide each point in a paragraph format. First paragraph needs to be an intro and include a thesis statement, Last paragraph needs to be a concluding statement.

para1: Intro; para2: Rationale: Users, Process Improvement, Opportunities to Improve (C2.3, C6.7); para3: Rationale: Optimizes Documentation and Reduction of Steps; para4: Rationale: Effects on Patient Care; para5: Rationale: Changes Based on Needs; para6: Research; para7: conclusion.

For the resources, make sure they are academic based. Each source must include either a doi or url.

HCI 670 Topic 5 Assignment Benchmark — Create a Workflow Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HCI-670	HCI-670-O500	Benchmark – Create a Workflow	110.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)	3: Satisfactory (79.00%)	4: Good (87.00%)	5: Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Criteria	100.0%
Workflow	20.0%	Workflow is not present.	The workflow is incomplete or incorrect about solving the identified problem and does not include at least six steps, a clearly defined start and stop, and accurate symbols.	The workflow lacks supporting details about solving the identified problem and may not include at least six steps, a clearly defined start and stop, and accurate symbols.	The workflow is complete and includes supporting details about solving the identified problem and includes at least six steps, a clearly defined start and stop, and accurate symbols.	The workflow is extremely thorough in solving the identified problem and includes at least six steps, a clearly defined start and stop, and accurate symbols.
Rationale: Users, Process Improvement, Opportunities to Improve (C2.3, C6.7)	10.0%	Rationale is not present.	Rationale includes an ineffective analysis of the clinical workflow by identifying the users and opportunities for process improvement. Rationale poorly explains how the workflow addresses these opportunities and improves the use of information and clinical decision making.	Rationale includes a vague analysis of the clinical workflow by identifying the users and opportunities for process improvement. Rationale minimally explains how the workflow addresses these opportunities and improves the use of information and clinical decision making.	Rationale includes a detailed analysis of the clinical workflow by identifying the users and opportunities for process improvement. Rationale directly explains how the workflow addresses these opportunities and improves the use of information and clinical decision making.	Rationale includes a comprehensive analysis of the clinical workflow by identifying the users and opportunities for process improvement. Rationale thoroughly explains how the workflow addresses these opportunities and improves the use of information and clinical decision making.
Rationale: Optimizes Documentation and Reduction of Steps	10.0%	Rationale is not present.	Rationale incorrectly describes how the future state workflow optimizes electronic documentation and reduces the number of steps.	Rationale unclearly describes how the future state workflow optimizes electronic documentation and reduces the number of steps.	Rationale effectively describes how the future state workflow optimizes electronic documentation and reduces the number of steps.	Rationale innovatively describes how the future state workflow optimizes electronic documentation and reduces the number of steps.
Rationale: Effects on Patient Care	10.0%	Rationale is not present.	Rationale inaccurately explains the effects of the future state workflow on patient care.	Rationale weakly explains the effects of the future state workflow on patient care.	Rationale aptly explains the effects of the future state workflow on patient care.	Rationale insightfully explains the effects of the future state workflow on patient care.
Rationale: Changes Based on Needs	10.0%	Rationale is not present.	Rationale inadequately explains how the future state workflow will change based on user needs and how the improvement plan will be developed.	Rationale ambiguously explains how the future state workflow will change based on user needs and how the improvement plan will be developed.	Rationale reasonably explains how the future state workflow will change based on user needs and how the improvement plan will be developed.	Rationale proficiently explains how the future state workflow will change based on user needs and how the improvement plan will be developed.
Research	5.0%	No outside sources were used to support the assignment.	Few outside sources were used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent.	Research is adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, or timeliness.	Research is timely and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.	Research is supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive and address all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.
Visual Appeal	5.0%	There are few or no graphic elements. No variation in layout or typography is evident.	Color is garish and/or typographic variations are overused and legibility suffers. Background interferes with readability. Understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships is limited.	Minimal use of graphic elements is evident. Elements do not consistently contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. There is some variation in type size, color, and layout.	Thematic graphic elements are used but not always in context. Visual connections mostly contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. Differences in type size or color are used well and consistently.	Appropriate and thematic graphic elements are used to make visual connections that contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. Differences in type size or color are used well and consistently.
Technical Skill	5.0%	Execution does not meet the criteria outlined.	Execution is sloppy and unprofessional.	Execution needs improvement.	Execution is of good quality.	Execution is flawless. Demonstrates an in-depth, high-level of understanding.
Aesthetic Quality	5.0%	Design is cluttered. Materials detract from the content or the purpose of presentation is low quality.	Design detracts from purpose. Text and visuals are too simplistic, cluttered, and busy. Little or no creativity or inventiveness is present.	Design is fairly clean, with a few exceptions. Materials add to, not detract from the presentation. Materials used were quality products and easy to see or hear.	Design is appropriate and integrates a variety of objects, charts, and graphs to amplify the message.	Design is clean. Skillful handling of text and visuals creates a distinctive and effective presentation. Overall, effective and functional audio, text, or visuals are evident.
Appropriateness	5.0%	There is no evidence that the student has selected an effective tool, technique, or paradigm to achieve the goal as defined in the project or course guideline. Materials (photo, sound files, video clips, apparel, illustrations, etc.) are missing.	Student selection of a tool, technique, or paradigm does not relate to the project or course goal. Student selects materials (photos, sound files, video clips, apparel, illustrations, etc.) that are not appropriate for the audience and the situation and are inadequately developed.	Student selects a tool, technique, or paradigm that achieves a basic representation as defined in the project or course guideline. Student selects materials (photos, sound files, video clips, apparel, illustrations, etc.) that are appropriate for the audience and the situation but some of the development of the material is inadequate.	Student selects an effective tool, technique, or paradigm to achieve the desired goal as defined in the project or course guideline. Student selects materials (photos, sound files, video clips, apparel, illustrations, etc.) that are appropriate for the audience and the situation.	Student shows a deep understanding of the audience and the situation by selecting material that enhances understanding. Student creates tools, techniques, or paradigms that effectively achieve the desired goal.
Originality	5.0%	The work is an extensive collection and rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought or inventiveness.	The work is a minimal collection or rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought.	The product shows evidence of originality. While based on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work does offer some new insights.	The product shows evidence of originality and inventiveness. While based somewhat on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work extends beyond that collection to offer new insights.	The product shows significant evidence of originality and inventiveness. The majority of the content and many of the ideas are fresh, original, inventive, and based upon logical conclusions and sound research.
Mechanics of Writing  (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

HCI 670 Topic 6 Assignment Benchmark — User Testing Script

Description

The purpose of this assignment is to apply user testing to the created workflow for the identified case study need.

Read the “Integrated Case Study” resource prior to beginning the assignment. In addition, refer to the instructor feedback you received on the Topic 5 assignment.

Write a 750-1,000 word test script that answers the following questions:

1. Who would be part of the user testing?
2. What are the elements to test?
3. What are the steps used to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements?
4. Are there any rules involved?
5. What is the action/outcome expected?
6. What would the action plan be if testing does not work?

Cite at least two scholarly resources in your response.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

HCI 670 Topic 6 Assignment Benchmark — User Testing Script Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HCI-670	HCI-670-O500	Benchmark – User Testing Script	115.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	2: Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)	3: Satisfactory (79.00%)	4: Good (87.00%)	5: Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	100.0%
User	10.0%	A description of who is part of the user testing is not present.	A description of who is part of the user testing is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of who is part of the user testing is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of who is part of the user testing is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of who is part of the user testing is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Elements to Test	10.0%	A description of the elements to test is not present.	A description of the elements to test is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the elements to test is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the elements to test is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the elements to test is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Testing Steps (C2.6, C6.10)	10.0%	An explanation of the steps to be taken to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements is not present.	An explanation of the steps to be taken to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the steps to be taken to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the steps to be taken to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the steps to be taken to perform acceptance testing, integration testing of new systems, and testing of system enhancements is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Rules	10.0%	A description of the rules used in the user testing is not present.	A description of the rules used in the user testing is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the rules used in the user testing is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the rules used in the user testing is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the rules used in the user testing is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Action or Outcome	10.0%	An explanation of the action or outcome expected from the user testing is not present.	An explanation of the action or outcome expected from the user testing is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the action or outcome expected from the user testing is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the action or outcome expected from the user testing is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the action or outcome expected from the user testing is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Action Plan	20.0%	An explanation of the action plan to be put in place if the user testing does not work is not present.	An explanation of the action plan to be put in place if the user testing does not work is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the action plan to be put in place if the user testing does not work is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the action plan to be put in place if the user testing does not work is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the action plan to be put in place if the user testing does not work is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

HCI 670 Topic 7 Assignment — Workflow Training

Description

The purpose of this assignment is to create materials to educate and train staff on the future state workflow created in Topic 5. Refer to your instructor’s feedback on that assignment for successful completion of this assignment.

Create an 8-10 slide PowerPoint presentation that could be used for leading a professional development for your staff on the future state workflow process.

Include a title slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes.

Be sure to include the following:

1. Objectives
2. Purpose of the workflow
3. Steps to creating the workflow
4. Purpose/Problem the workflow solves
5. Key changes or improvements
6. Who is impacted and why

Include three to five scholarly resources to support your findings.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

HCI 670 Topic 7 Assignment — Workflow Training Rubric

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HCI-670	HCI-670-O500	Workflow Training	85.0
Criteria	Percentage	1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	2: Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)	3: Satisfactory (79.00%)	4: Good (87.00%)	5: Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	100.0%
Objectives	5.0%	An explanation of the objectives of the presentation and workflow is not present.	An explanation of the objectives of the presentation and workflow is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the objectives of the presentation and workflow is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the objectives of the presentation and workflow is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the objectives of the presentation and workflow is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Purpose	5.0%	An explanation of the purpose of the workflow is not present.	An explanation of the purpose of the workflow is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the purpose of the workflow is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the purpose of the workflow is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the purpose of the workflow is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Steps	5.0%	An explanation of the steps taken to create the workflow is not present.	An explanation of the steps taken to create the workflow is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of the steps taken to create the workflow is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of the steps taken to create the workflow is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of the steps taken to create the workflow is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Problem	10.0%	A description of problem the workflow solves is not present.	A description of problem the workflow solves is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of problem the workflow solves is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of problem the workflow solves is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of problem the workflow solves is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Key Changes	10.0%	A description of the key changes or improvements is not present.	A description of the key changes or improvements is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the key changes or improvements is included but lacks supporting details.	A description of the key changes or improvements is complete and includes supporting details.	A description of the key changes or improvements is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Impact	5.0%	An explanation of who is impacted by the workflow and why is not present.	An explanation of who is impacted by the workflow and why is incomplete or incorrect.	An explanation of who is impacted by the workflow and why is included but lacks supporting details.	An explanation of who is impacted by the workflow and why is complete and includes supporting details.	An explanation of who is impacted by the workflow and why is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Presentation of Content	30.0%	The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.	The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.	The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other.	The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.	The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
Layout	10.0%	The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.	The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.	The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.	The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.	The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)	10.0%	Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.	Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.	Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.	The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.	The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
Mechanics of Writing  (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.	Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.	Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%

HCI 670 Topic 8 Assignment Benchmark — Internal Presentation

Assignment

Benchmark – Internal Presentation

The purpose of this assignment is to present the steps taken to identify and solve an EHR problem. This PowerPoint presentation is designed for executive leadership and explains the work done to solve the identified problem in the case study.

Create a 10-15 slide PowerPoint presentation overviewing the informatics solution to the identified problems in the “Integrated Case Study” resource. Include the following information:

1. Describe the gap/need identified.
2. Describe the electronic form created to assist the oncology RN navigator
3. Describe the future state workflow created to meet the needs of the EHR.
4. Explain how principles of human factor engineering and user interface were integrated into the design and implementation of the informatics solution.
5. Outline the evaluation measures for the informatics solution.
6. Describe the process for evaluating the success of the informatics solution.

Include cover slide, reference slide, and presenter’s notes.

Include three to five credible resources to support your findings.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

HCI 670 Topic 8 Assignment Benchmark — Internal Presentation Rubric

Make Your Nursing Academic Journey Truly Fulfilling with Our Expert Nursing Assignment Writing Help!

Feeling overwhelmed by the demands of your nursing essays and assignments? Don’t let stress derail your academic success. ReliablePapers.com is your partner in navigating the challenges of nursing studies. Our reliable nursing paper writing services are tailored to lighten your assignment load and ensure your journey in nursing education is not just manageable, but truly fulfilling.

Expertise That Sets Us Apart

At ReliablePapers.com, we understand the unique struggles faced by nursing students. That’s why we’ve assembled a team of seasoned nursing writers who are not only experts in their field but also passionate about helping students succeed. Our writers bring years of academic writing experience and a deep understanding of nursing topics, ensuring that your papers are meticulously crafted to meet the highest standards.

Why Choose ReliablePapers.com for Your Nursing Essays?

• Experienced Nursing Writers: Our team comprises experienced nursing professionals who are dedicated to delivering top-quality nursing papers tailored to your requirements.
• Direct Communication: You’ll have direct communication with your assigned writer, allowing for seamless collaboration and transparency throughout the writing process.
• Affordable Prices: We understand the financial constraints of students, which is why we offer competitive prices starting at just $10 per page.
• Guaranteed Originality: Plagiarism is a strict no-no at ReliablePapers.com. We guarantee 100% original, custom-made papers that reflect your unique voice and understanding.
• Timely Support: With our fast turnaround times and dedicated support team, you can rest assured that your papers will be delivered on time, every time.
• Hassle-Free Ordering: Ordering a custom nursing paper from ReliablePapers.com is quick and easy. Simply provide your details, and our experts will take care of the rest.

Why Struggle When Help Is Just a Click Away?

Don’t let nursing assignments overwhelm you. With ReliablePapers.com’s nursing writing help services, you can reclaim your time, achieve top grades, and stay ahead of the curve. Order your custom nursing paper today and unlock your full potential with ReliablePapers.com!

Don’t Let Stress Define Your Nursing Academic Journey

Place your order with ReliablePapers.com today and experience the difference firsthand. Whether you need to buy nursing research papers, get cheap nursing papers, or professional nursing coursework help, we’ve got you covered. Trust us with your nursing assignments, and let us help you succeed in your nursing studies.

Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!