The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here:

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Leif Groop

Leif Groop

Principal investigator

Leif Groop

What do healthcare professionals need to turn risk models for type 2 diabetes into usable computerized clinical decision support systems? Lessons learned from the MOSAIC project


  • Giuseppe Fico
  • Liss Hernanzez
  • Jorge Cancela
  • Arianna Dagliati
  • Lucia Sacchi
  • Antonio Martinez-Millana
  • Jorge Posada
  • Lidia Manero
  • Jose Verdú
  • Andrea Facchinetti
  • Manuel Ottaviano
  • Konstantia Zarkogianni
  • Konstantina Nikita
  • Leif Groop
  • Rafael Gabriel-Sanchez
  • Luca Chiovato
  • Vicente Traver
  • Juan Francisco Merino-Torres
  • Claudio Cobelli
  • Riccardo Bellazzi
  • Maria Teresa Arredondo

Summary, in English

Background: To understand user needs, system requirements and organizational conditions towards successful design and adoption of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) care built on top of computerized risk models. Methods: The holistic and evidence-based CEHRES Roadmap, used to create eHealth solutions through participatory development approach, persuasive design techniques and business modelling, was adopted in the MOSAIC project to define the sequence of multidisciplinary methods organized in three phases, user needs, implementation and evaluation. The research was qualitative, the total number of participants was ninety, about five-seventeen involved in each round of experiment. Results: Prediction models for the onset of T2D are built on clinical studies, while for T2D care are derived from healthcare registries. Accordingly, two set of DSSs were defined: the first, T2D Screening, introduces a novel routine; in the second case, T2D Care, DSSs can support managers at population level, and daily practitioners at individual level. In the user needs phase, T2D Screening and solution T2D Care at population level share similar priorities, as both deal with risk-stratification. End-users of T2D Screening and solution T2D Care at individual level prioritize easiness of use and satisfaction, while managers prefer the tools to be available every time and everywhere. In the implementation phase, three Use Cases were defined for T2D Screening, adapting the tool to different settings and granularity of information. Two Use Cases were defined around solutions T2D Care at population and T2D Care at individual, to be used in primary or secondary care. Suitable filtering options were equipped with "attractive" visual analytics to focus the attention of end-users on specific parameters and events. In the evaluation phase, good levels of user experience versus bad level of usability suggest that end-users of T2D Screening perceived the potential, but they are worried about complexity. Usability and user experience were above acceptable thresholds for T2D Care at population and T2D Care at individual. Conclusions: By using a holistic approach, we have been able to understand user needs, behaviours and interactions and give new insights in the definition of effective Decision Support Systems to deal with the complexity of T2D care.


  • EXODIAB: Excellence of Diabetes Research in Sweden

Publishing year





BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making



Document type

Journal article


BioMed Central (BMC)


  • Information Systems, Social aspects


  • Computerized decision support systems
  • Human centred design
  • Multi-disciplinary approach
  • Risk modelling
  • Type 2 diabetes



Research group

  • LUDC (Lund University Diabetes Centre)


  • ISSN: 1472-6947