Skip to main content

Table 2 Overview of participating clinicians and quantitative study outcomes

From: Use of a digital tool to support the diagnostic process in memory clinics–a usability study

ID

Age (y)

Specialization

Experience in MC (y)

Tool used (n)

Modules used

Satisfaction [0-100, mean]1

Usability, SUS [0-100, mean]2

Confidence in diagnosis [0-100, mean]1

cCOG

cMRI

cDSI/ report

1

49

Neurology

21

5

2

1

4

65 (20-80)

67.5

73 (55-90)

2

42

Geriatrics

16

4

2

0

4

28 (0-70)

35.0

90 (80-95)

3

51

Neurology

15

8

5

7

8

93 (90-100)

87.5

89 (80-95)

4

38

Geriatrics

11

4

4

0

4

51 (20-65)

70.0

85 (80-95)

5

39

Neurology

10

NA3

NA3

NA3

NA3

NA3

70.0

NA3

6

35

Internal elderly care medicine

6

4

3

1

3

53 (20-90)

27.5

77 (65-90)

7

42

Geriatrics

6

1

1

0

1

80

52.5

70

8

36

Geriatrics

4

1

0

0

1

68 (55-80)

52.5

78 (75-80)

9

36

Internal elderly care medicine

2

1

1

0

0

50

Missing

90

10

31

Internal elderly care medicine

2

1

0

0

1

42 (30-55)

67.5

60 (40-75)

11

30

Internal elderly care medicine

2

2

0

0

2

50

35.0

80

12

32

Internal elderly care medicine

1

1

0

0

1

80

60.0

65

13

39

Internal elderly care medicine

0

1

1

1

0

80

Missing

80

14

33

Internal elderly care medicine

0

1

0

0

1

70

Missing

80

  1. 1Post-tool questionnaires, average scores and range, if applicable, 2Post-study questionnaire, 3Not applicable: clinician 9 is a nurse practitioner who prepared the diagnostic results consultations for clinician 8, but did not take part in these consultations
  2. MC memory clinic: SUS system usability scale. NOTE a SUS score ≥68 would be considered above average