Project overview / my role
Develop UX wireframes to address user feedback
Create clickable prototypes
Help to define test protocol for user testing sessions
Deliver final UX/UI design
Current user feedback & pain points
Confusing selection states
The selected and active states were identical which caused users to mistake which studies were actually loaded in a viewport.Disjointed layout
Studies and series were organized into two panels that scrolled independently making it very easy for users to lose context of studies and series.Loss of information
The study year would scroll out of view if the list of studies was too long. Date is one of the most important details in determining which study to view in evaluating progress or regression.Limited Filtering
Filtering only by modality wasn’t helpful in finding relevant studies for comparison.
Information architecture
Options were explored that focused on removing the confusion of a “selected study.” Users needed a way to expand series and know which study the series belonged to. They also need to know which study or series were actively hung in the viewport.
Option 1
The first option was to create two separate panels for studies and series. Selecting a study would then slide in a series panel covering the studies to allow user the ability to select a series to hang. Once finished user could navigate back to the study list.
Option 2
The second option incorporated collapsible study sections that could be expanded and contracted to show or hide the series list. This also allowed uses the ability to open and view series from more than one study at a time.
Both options incorporated multiple series view types to introduce an additional level of control to users.
Clear, consistent states & information clarity
Updated selected & loaded states and additional view types for series were explored:
Alternative options to denote a primary exam were explored:
The year was added to the header so that users wouldn’t lose context of the study date:
Additional edge cases were considered such as how to treat studies with many series:
Additional filtering capabilities were explored including the addition of quick tabs that give one click control to filter the list to only the “relevant” studies (relevant to the selected study) or “imaging” only. Advanced filters were added which allow for more control over the display of the patient history.
User feedback
Helped to define research goals and testing questions. Provided relevant visuals and prototypes.
Helped to analyze feedback and update design recommendations:
Final designs
Based on user feedback, the preferred interaction option was refined. The entire year and study time were added to the studies. Final visual design was refined to help differentiate the study from the series.
Tool tips were explored that incorporated a larger thumbnail view and truncated text details.
