public-health
What makes a COVID dashboard actionable?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Of 158 public dashboards from 53 countries, only 12.7% were highly actionable; experts distilled seven shared design features.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — Descriptive assessment + expert nominal-group scoring of public COVID-19 dashboards
- N
- N=158 · 158 dashboards from 53 countries; expert panel n=17
- Population
- Public web-based COVID-19 dashboards globally (July 2020 sample)
- Outcome
- Actionability features and prevalence of purpose/content/display practices
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Key findings
63% government-built; 58.9% national scope. Only 12.7% stated purpose and audience. Epidemiology dominated (98.1%); social/economic and behavioral indicators were rare. 24.7% omitted data sources. 20 dashboards (12.7%) were highly actionable, sharing seven features from knowing the audience to storytelling/visual cues.
Methodology
Descriptively assessed a multimethod global sample of COVID-19 dashboards (July 2020) and scored actionability with an international expert panel (n=17) using nominal group technique.
Limitations
July 2020 snapshot cannot judge later dashboards; expert appraisal is not a controlled trial of decision outcomes from dashboard use.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.