Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1996-4-1
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
This paper reports on a qualitative study using an argumentation-based design method (Argumentative Design) in the development of clinical software systems. The method, which requires visualization of the underlying design goals, the specific needs-for-change, and the probable consequences of the alternative design measures, caused previously implicit argument structures to be exposed and discussed. This uncovering of hidden agendas also revealed previously implicit coalitions and organizational influences on the design process. Implications for software development practices in medical informatics are discussed.
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:volume |
8 Pt 2
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
1579-83
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2008-7-10
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1995
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Inside multi-disciplinary design in medical informatics: experiences from the use of an argumentative design method.
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Departments of Computer Science and Community Medicine, Linkoping University, Sweden.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
|