M.S. Kleinsmann
Please Note
50 records found
1
From thought to visual composition
A brain-driven visual blends technique for visual blending tasks
Visual blends is a design technique that combines elements from multiple images into harmonious compositions and has been increasingly explored as a means to support early-stage ideation in engineering design. However, existing blending workflows rely heavily on manual image selection and composition, making the process difficult, time-consuming, and skill-intensive for designers. In this work, we present a proof-of-concept brain-guided visual blends technique that integrates an EEG-to-image model to simplify the image acquisition process and a local image editing model to enable automated and controllable image composition. Our EEG-to-image model employs a two-stage training strategy, combining pretraining on large-scale unlabelled EEG data with fine-tuning in an EEG-conditioned diffusion model, achieving state-of-the-art performance in reconstructing visual stimuli. To support visual blending tasks, we incorporate a local editing model (Paint-by-Example) that generates coherent blends using user-provided masks, reference images, and backgrounds. A user study with 15 participants demonstrated that the model effectively supported the creation of visual blends that aligned with users' design vision, even without artistic skills. The results suggest that brain-guided blending can serve as a early-stage ideation interface in engineering design, helping designers iterate on mental concepts before formal modelling and evaluation.
Interorganizational Mechanisms for Developing and Implementing Clinical Decision Support Systems in Primary Care
Exploratory, Qualitative Case Study
Background: Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have the potential to improve patient safety and reduce costs in primary care. However, CDSS adoption remains limited due to development and implementation challenges. CDSSs are complex interventions involving multiple interacting components that require technological innovation and behavioral and organizational change. Additionally, the primary care context is considered a complex system with high care demand, fragmented structures, and many independent yet interdependent organizations. Established determinant frameworks for implementing and scaling up complex health care interventions support the identification of implementation determinants. However, they offer limited guidance on the underlying processes of these determinants, such as the implementation processes involved in complex interorganizational collaboration in primary care. Objective: This study examined how an interorganizational collaboration in Dutch primary care (Gezonde zorg, Gezonde regio [GzGr]) achieved an iterative CDSS development and implementation. We aimed to identify the mechanisms that supported the collaboration in overcoming challenges. Methods: We performed an exploratory process-level case study. Data were collected through 15 semistructured interviews. The nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability framework was used to ensure comprehensive topic coverage during the interviews, but not as an analytical framework. We triangulated the interviews with internal and external documents and expert input. Using a thematic, inductive approach, we developed a chronological overview of the collaboration and identified mechanisms offering insights into how GzGr navigated complexity in the development and implementation of CDSS. Results: We identified two mechanisms: (1) enacting an interorganizational value model and (2) iterative, co-creative experimentation. First, GzGr was driven by a coalition of the willing (ie, individuals willing to take an extra step), with shared goals that prioritized collective benefit while respecting organizational values. They established shared principles that translated the broad GzGr mission into concrete CDSS development choices, while also guiding strategic expansion by involving mission-aligned, innovative organizations. Second, after initial prototypes, GzGr established an iterative learning and improvement experimentation for both the technology and the collaboration. This process allowed for rapid feedback, validation of added value, and ongoing refinement. Additionally, this experimentation approached the development and implementation phase as a continuous process involving multistakeholders, supporting both the technology and the collaboration. Conclusions: This study identified 2 mechanisms that sustained interorganizational collaboration and CDSS development. These mechanisms connected collaborative and technical changes across people, technology, and organizational levels, enabling technological viability, stakeholder value, and multilevel support. The mechanisms operated both within and between organizations through iterative cycles of development and implementation. Practical implications include involving multilevel, innovative, and influential stakeholders; maintaining alignment through an orchestrating actor; and adopting an iterative approach between development and implementation. Our findings extend existing determinant frameworks by offering process-level insights into how such mechanisms help overcome challenges in the development and implementation of CDSS within interorganizational collaborations.
Purpose: To address capacity problems at tertiary-level neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) within current staffing limitations, our study aims to demonstrate the feasibility of identifying very preterm neonates not in need of highly specialised, tertiary-level, NICU care. Methods: We developed and internally validated a clinical prediction model to identify very preterm neonates in need of tertiary-level NICU care within the first 72 h after birth in the Netherlands. The outcome was defined as one or more of: 1) endotracheal surfactant administration, 2) endotracheal/mechanical ventilation, and 3) inotropic administration. Multivariable logistic regression, with a priori selected predictors, was used on a retrospective cohort of very preterm neonates admitted to the tertiary-level NICU of Erasmus MC Sophia Children’s Hospital, between January 2018 and December 2022. Bootstrapping was used for internal validation. Results: Of 654 included neonates, 45.1% (n = 295) needed tertiary-level NICU care. The final model included six predictors. Evaluating the model’s discriminative performance resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve of 0.77 [95%CI: 0.73–0.80]. A low-risk classification threshold of 20% yielded high sensitivity (93% [95%CI 90–96%]) and a specificity of 26% [95%CI: 22–31%], predicting a low risk of needing tertiary-level NICU care for 114 neonates, accurately selecting 94 of them. Conclusion: This prediction model demonstrates the feasibility of perinatal identification of very preterm neonates not in need of tertiary-level NICU care. Future research should focus on updating the model to a source population of women with imminent preterm birth.
In-hospital nudging intervention increases patients' healthy dietary choices
A quasi-experimental study
Methods: This pre-postintervention study included a baseline phase and an intervention phase (7+7 months) and was carried out at the cardiology ward of a large hospital. All 2419 cardiac patients admitted to the ward during this period, and their 7559 meals were part of this study. The nudging intervention consisted of choice architecture, visual cues and informational nudges (eg, traffic light menus, posters). Data on dietary choices (vegetarian, fish, meat, side salad and fruit salad) were collected from the electronic food ordering system. As a secondary outcome, the intention to eat healthy after discharge was measured using the 20-item long Dutch Dietary Intention Evaluation Tool.
Results: During the intervention period, there was a statistically significant increase in the selection of vegetarian meals (20.1% vs 16.3%, p<0.001), fish meals (24.6% vs 18.7%, p<0.001), side salads (54.5% vs 49.5%, p<0.001) and fruit salads (12.8% vs 8.6%, p<0.001) when compared with the baseline period. In addition, patients in the intervention period expressed a significantly higher intention to eat healthy after discharge compared with the baseline period (β=0.167, SE=0.083, p=0.045).
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a straightforward, easily implementable nudging intervention effectively promotes healthy dietary choices among in-hospital cardiac patients and enhances their intention to eat healthy after discharge. ...
Methods: This pre-postintervention study included a baseline phase and an intervention phase (7+7 months) and was carried out at the cardiology ward of a large hospital. All 2419 cardiac patients admitted to the ward during this period, and their 7559 meals were part of this study. The nudging intervention consisted of choice architecture, visual cues and informational nudges (eg, traffic light menus, posters). Data on dietary choices (vegetarian, fish, meat, side salad and fruit salad) were collected from the electronic food ordering system. As a secondary outcome, the intention to eat healthy after discharge was measured using the 20-item long Dutch Dietary Intention Evaluation Tool.
Results: During the intervention period, there was a statistically significant increase in the selection of vegetarian meals (20.1% vs 16.3%, p<0.001), fish meals (24.6% vs 18.7%, p<0.001), side salads (54.5% vs 49.5%, p<0.001) and fruit salads (12.8% vs 8.6%, p<0.001) when compared with the baseline period. In addition, patients in the intervention period expressed a significantly higher intention to eat healthy after discharge compared with the baseline period (β=0.167, SE=0.083, p=0.045).
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a straightforward, easily implementable nudging intervention effectively promotes healthy dietary choices among in-hospital cardiac patients and enhances their intention to eat healthy after discharge.
Implementation and effectiveness of teleneonatology for neonatal intensive care units
A protocol for a hybrid type III implementation pilot
Methods: A pre-post implementation study with hybrid type III design will be conducted from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2024. The year 2023 will serve as a baseline period pre-implementation. From 1 January 2024, a TeleNeonatology device will be integrated within all communication between the NICU-level IV of the Erasmus MC hospital and the NICU-level II at Amphia Hospital. Outcomes of the implementation of the TeleNeo programme will be evaluated using a mixed-methods approach evaluating implementation outcomes, service outcomes and client outcomes. Feasibility, the primary implementation outcome, will be evaluated via a validated questionnaire for parents and personnel. Secondary implementation outcomes will be barriers and facilitators of implementation, based on semi-structured interviews and focus groups. A cost minimisation analysis, using decision trees, will be evaluated as service outcomes. Client outcomes will be assessed via parent-reported transfer experience questionnaires and interviews and the clinical outcomes NICU-level III transfer rate and length of stay.
Ethics and dissemination: This study was reviewed by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus Medical Centre, who confirmed that the rules laid down in the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act do not apply (identification number: MEC-2023–0561). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals in two separate scientific articles: the primary evaluation and the cost evaluation. ...
Methods: A pre-post implementation study with hybrid type III design will be conducted from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2024. The year 2023 will serve as a baseline period pre-implementation. From 1 January 2024, a TeleNeonatology device will be integrated within all communication between the NICU-level IV of the Erasmus MC hospital and the NICU-level II at Amphia Hospital. Outcomes of the implementation of the TeleNeo programme will be evaluated using a mixed-methods approach evaluating implementation outcomes, service outcomes and client outcomes. Feasibility, the primary implementation outcome, will be evaluated via a validated questionnaire for parents and personnel. Secondary implementation outcomes will be barriers and facilitators of implementation, based on semi-structured interviews and focus groups. A cost minimisation analysis, using decision trees, will be evaluated as service outcomes. Client outcomes will be assessed via parent-reported transfer experience questionnaires and interviews and the clinical outcomes NICU-level III transfer rate and length of stay.
Ethics and dissemination: This study was reviewed by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus Medical Centre, who confirmed that the rules laid down in the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act do not apply (identification number: MEC-2023–0561). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals in two separate scientific articles: the primary evaluation and the cost evaluation.
Implementation and effectiveness of Teleneonatology for neonatal intensive care unit consultations in the Netherlands
A hybrid type III implementation pilot
Background: Real-time audiovisual communication between healthcare providers (HCP) at different hospitals (TeleNeonatology) can improve neonatal outcomes, address capacity challenges, and reduce emotional burden on parents. Despite its potential, TeleNeonatology has yet to be widely implemented in routine clinical care, partly due to non-optimal integration into care pathways and working routines. To provide insights for further adoption, this study presents the evaluation of a pilot in the Netherlands. Methods: A prospective hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation study was conducted in 2024. During the pilot, a TeleNeo program facilitated both acute and elective communication between Erasmus MC NICU-level IV and Amphia NICU-level II. The TeleNeo program was developed and continuously improved during the pilot using co-creation with HCP and parents to enable embedding in care pathways and working routines. A mixed-methods approach was used for evaluation. The primary outcome was a validated 21-item usability questionnaire with five-points Likert Scale questions for parents (n = 50) and HCP (n = 85). Implementation determinants were evaluated with semi-structured interviews and surveys. Effectiveness was measured via parent reported experiences, and clinical outcomes length-of-stay and transfer rate. Results: Twelve months of implementation led to 99 consultations for 50 patients and families, including 33 acute patients, possibly in need of an acute transfer. Evaluation showed high feasibility and adoption. Usability was high among parents (n = 26, median score 5 [interquartile rage: 4–5]) and HCP (n = 48, median score 5 [interquartile range 4–5]). Parents valued rapid expert availability, involvement in transfer decisions, and experienced shared care between the NICUs. HCP observed quick and approachable communication, quicker medical decisions, improved quality of care, and smoother transitions between NICUs. Nurses were able to be more pro-active. In 18% (6/33) of acute cases transfers were perceived to be prevented. HCP highlighted TeleNeo’s influence on the local teams’ autonomy, communication styles, and financial aspects as important barriers in interviews (n = 12) and questionnaires (n = 65). Conclusions: Pilot implementation showed high feasibility of our TeleNeo program, enabling shared care at the optimal location for our patients. Our findings will guide a robust strategy for implementation in the Southwest of the Netherlands, enhancing neonatal care, parental satisfaction and nursing experience.
Design Science
Why, What and How – Revisited
Towards designing for health outcomes
Implications for designers in eHealth design
Learning-based Artificial Intelligence Artwork
Methodology Taxonomy and Quality Evaluation
Challenges in implementing digital health in clinical practice hinder its potential. The complexities posed by implementation could benefit from using design practices. To explore the current role of design practices in digital health implementation, designers in the Netherlands were interviewed. The preliminary results indicate that designers contribute to digital health implementation processes, especially in the early stages. Design practices are mainly used for engaging the users, testing concepts, aligning the ideas of stakeholders, and adapting interventions to fit within the contexts.
Designing remote patient and family centred interventions
an exploratory approach
Neonatal intensive care unit admissions of newborns are emotional and stressful for parents, influencing their mental and physical well-being and resulting in high rates of psychological morbidities. Significant research has been undertaken to understand and quantify the burden of a newborn’s medical journey on parents’ well-being. Simultaneously, an increase has been observed in the development and implementation of telemedicine interventions, defined as the remote delivery of health care. Telemedicine is used as an overarching term for different technological interventions grouped as real-time audio-visual communication, remote patient monitoring, and asynchronous communication. Various telemedicine interventions have been proposed and developed but scarcely with the primary goal of improving parental well-being during their newborn’s medical journey.
Objective:
This study aims to identify telemedicine interventions with the potential to improve parents’ well-being and to present the methods used to measure their experience.
Methods:
A scoping review was conducted, including empirical studies evaluating telemedicine in neonatal care that either measured parental well-being or included parents in the evaluation. Abstract and title screening, full-text screening, and data extraction were performed by three researchers. Two researchers were needed to reach decisions on both the inclusion and extraction of articles.
Results:
The review included 50 out of 737 screened articles. Telemedicine interventions focused mainly on daily visits at the neonatal intensive care unit and discharge preparedness for parents. Surveys were the primary tool used for outcome measurement (36/50, 72%). Aspects of parents’ well-being were evaluated in 62% (31/50) of studies. Telemedicine interventions developed to provide education and support showed a potential to improve self-efficacy and discharge preparedness and decrease anxiety and stress when they included a real-time telemedicine component.
Conclusions:
This scoping review identified specific telemedicine interventions, such as real-time audio-visual communication and eHealth apps, that have the potential to improve parental well-being by enhancing self-efficacy and discharge preparedness, and reducing anxiety and stress. However, more insights are needed to understand how these interventions affect well-being. Parents should be included in future research in both the development and evaluation stages. It is important to not only measure parents’ perceptions but also focus on the impact of a telemedicine intervention on their well-being. ...
Neonatal intensive care unit admissions of newborns are emotional and stressful for parents, influencing their mental and physical well-being and resulting in high rates of psychological morbidities. Significant research has been undertaken to understand and quantify the burden of a newborn’s medical journey on parents’ well-being. Simultaneously, an increase has been observed in the development and implementation of telemedicine interventions, defined as the remote delivery of health care. Telemedicine is used as an overarching term for different technological interventions grouped as real-time audio-visual communication, remote patient monitoring, and asynchronous communication. Various telemedicine interventions have been proposed and developed but scarcely with the primary goal of improving parental well-being during their newborn’s medical journey.
Objective:
This study aims to identify telemedicine interventions with the potential to improve parents’ well-being and to present the methods used to measure their experience.
Methods:
A scoping review was conducted, including empirical studies evaluating telemedicine in neonatal care that either measured parental well-being or included parents in the evaluation. Abstract and title screening, full-text screening, and data extraction were performed by three researchers. Two researchers were needed to reach decisions on both the inclusion and extraction of articles.
Results:
The review included 50 out of 737 screened articles. Telemedicine interventions focused mainly on daily visits at the neonatal intensive care unit and discharge preparedness for parents. Surveys were the primary tool used for outcome measurement (36/50, 72%). Aspects of parents’ well-being were evaluated in 62% (31/50) of studies. Telemedicine interventions developed to provide education and support showed a potential to improve self-efficacy and discharge preparedness and decrease anxiety and stress when they included a real-time telemedicine component.
Conclusions:
This scoping review identified specific telemedicine interventions, such as real-time audio-visual communication and eHealth apps, that have the potential to improve parental well-being by enhancing self-efficacy and discharge preparedness, and reducing anxiety and stress. However, more insights are needed to understand how these interventions affect well-being. Parents should be included in future research in both the development and evaluation stages. It is important to not only measure parents’ perceptions but also focus on the impact of a telemedicine intervention on their well-being.
Patient and staff experience is a vital factor to consider in the evaluation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) interventions. However, no comprehensive overview of available RPM patient and staff experience–measuring methods and tools exists.
Objective:
This review aimed at obtaining a comprehensive set of experience constructs and corresponding measuring instruments used in contemporary RPM research and at proposing an initial set of guidelines for improving methodological standardization in this domain.
Methods:
Full-text papers reporting on instances of patient or staff experience measuring in RPM interventions, written in English, and published after January 1, 2011, were considered for eligibility. By “RPM interventions,” we referred to interventions including sensor-based patient monitoring used for clinical decision-making; papers reporting on other kinds of interventions were therefore excluded. Papers describing primary care interventions, involving participants under 18 years of age, or focusing on attitudes or technologies rather than specific interventions were also excluded. We searched 2 electronic databases, Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE, on February 12, 2021.We explored and structured the obtained corpus of data through correspondence analysis, a multivariate statistical technique.
Results:
In total, 158 papers were included, covering RPM interventions in a variety of domains. From these studies, we reported 546 experience-measuring instances in RPM, covering the use of 160 unique experience-measuring instruments to measure 120 unique experience constructs. We found that the research landscape has seen a sizeable growth in the past decade, that it is affected by a relative lack of focus on the experience of staff, and that the overall corpus of collected experience measures can be organized in 4 main categories (service system related, care related, usage and adherence related, and health outcome related). In the light of the collected findings, we provided a set of 6 actionable recommendations to RPM patient and staff experience evaluators, in terms of both what to measure and how to measure it. Overall, we suggested that RPM researchers and practitioners include experience measuring as part of integrated, interdisciplinary data strategies for continuous RPM evaluation.
Conclusions:
At present, there is a lack of consensus and standardization in the methods used to measure patient and staff experience in RPM, leading to a critical knowledge gap in our understanding of the impact of RPM interventions. This review offers targeted support for RPM experience evaluators by providing a structured, comprehensive overview of contemporary patient and staff experience measures and a set of practical guidelines for improving research quality and standardization in this domain. ...
Patient and staff experience is a vital factor to consider in the evaluation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) interventions. However, no comprehensive overview of available RPM patient and staff experience–measuring methods and tools exists.
Objective:
This review aimed at obtaining a comprehensive set of experience constructs and corresponding measuring instruments used in contemporary RPM research and at proposing an initial set of guidelines for improving methodological standardization in this domain.
Methods:
Full-text papers reporting on instances of patient or staff experience measuring in RPM interventions, written in English, and published after January 1, 2011, were considered for eligibility. By “RPM interventions,” we referred to interventions including sensor-based patient monitoring used for clinical decision-making; papers reporting on other kinds of interventions were therefore excluded. Papers describing primary care interventions, involving participants under 18 years of age, or focusing on attitudes or technologies rather than specific interventions were also excluded. We searched 2 electronic databases, Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE, on February 12, 2021.We explored and structured the obtained corpus of data through correspondence analysis, a multivariate statistical technique.
Results:
In total, 158 papers were included, covering RPM interventions in a variety of domains. From these studies, we reported 546 experience-measuring instances in RPM, covering the use of 160 unique experience-measuring instruments to measure 120 unique experience constructs. We found that the research landscape has seen a sizeable growth in the past decade, that it is affected by a relative lack of focus on the experience of staff, and that the overall corpus of collected experience measures can be organized in 4 main categories (service system related, care related, usage and adherence related, and health outcome related). In the light of the collected findings, we provided a set of 6 actionable recommendations to RPM patient and staff experience evaluators, in terms of both what to measure and how to measure it. Overall, we suggested that RPM researchers and practitioners include experience measuring as part of integrated, interdisciplinary data strategies for continuous RPM evaluation.
Conclusions:
At present, there is a lack of consensus and standardization in the methods used to measure patient and staff experience in RPM, leading to a critical knowledge gap in our understanding of the impact of RPM interventions. This review offers targeted support for RPM experience evaluators by providing a structured, comprehensive overview of contemporary patient and staff experience measures and a set of practical guidelines for improving research quality and standardization in this domain.
Background: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) tremendously affects patient health and health care globally. Changing lifestyle behaviors can help curb the burden of T2D. However, health behavior change is a complex interplay of medical, behavioral, and psychological factors. Personalized lifestyle advice and promotion of self-management can help patients change their health behavior and improve glucose regulation. Digital tools are effective in areas of self-management and have great potential to support patient self-management due to low costs, 24/7 availability, and the option of dynamic automated feedback. To develop successful eHealth solutions, it is important to include stakeholders throughout the development and use a structured approach to guide the development team in planning, coordinating, and executing the development process. Objective: The aim of this study is to develop an integrated, eHealth-supported, educational care pathway for patients with T2D. Methods: The educational care pathway was developed using the first 3 phases of the Center for eHealth and Wellbeing Research roadmap: the contextual inquiry, the value specification, and the design phase. Following this roadmap, we used a scoping review about diabetes self-management education and eHealth, past experiences of eHealth practices in our hospital, focus groups with health care professionals (HCPs), and a patient panel to develop a prototype of an educational care pathway. This care pathway is called the Diabetes Box (Leiden University Medical Center) and consists of personalized education, digital educational material, self-measurements of glucose, blood pressure, activity, and sleep, and a smartphone app to bring it all together. Results: The scoping review highlights the importance of self-management education and the potential of telemonitoring and mobile apps for blood glucose regulation in patients with T2D. Focus groups with HCPs revealed the importance of including all relevant lifestyle factors, using a tailored approach, and using digital consultations. The contextual inquiry led to a set of values that stakeholders found important to include in the educational care pathway. All values were specified in biweekly meetings with key stakeholders, and a prototype was designed. This prototype was evaluated in a patient panel that revealed an overall positive impression of the care pathway but stressed that the number of apps should be restricted to one, that there should be no delay in glucose value visualization, and that insulin use should be incorporated into the app. Both patients and HCPs stressed the importance of direct automated feedback in the Diabetes Box. Conclusions: After developing the Diabetes Box prototype using the Center for eHealth and Wellbeing Research roadmap, all stakeholders believe that the concept of the Diabetes Box is useful and feasible and that direct automated feedback and education on stress and sleep are essential. A pilot study is planned to assess feasibility, acceptability, and usefulness in more detail.