The development and usability testing of two arts-based knowledge translation tools for pediatric procedural pain
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Procedures carried out in acute care settings, such as emergency departments (EDs), are among the most common sources of acute pain experienced by children. Such procedures may include intravenous insertions (IVs), venipuncture, and wound irrigation and repair. Inadequately managed procedural pain can cause negative short-term and long-term implications for children, ranging from anxiety to aversion to healthcare. Parents have repeatedly expressed that they do not have the necessary tools to comfort or distract their child during uncomfortable medical procedures. As such, the purpose of this study was to work with parents to develop and evaluate two digital tools for pediatric procedural pain. A whiteboard animation video and interactive infographic were developed following a systematic review and interview with parents. Prototypes were tested in five ED waiting rooms in two Canadian provinces. Sites included those in urban, rural, and remote settings. Overall, parents rated the tools highly, suggesting that engaging with parents to develop arts-based digital tools is a highly effective method in ensuring that parents can understand and utilize complex health information. Author Contributions This study was conducted under the supervision of Drs. Shannon D. Scott (SDS) and Lisa Hartling (LH), PIs for translation Evidence in Child Health to enhance Outcomes (ECHO) Research and the Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), respectively. Both PIs designed the research study and obtained research funding through Translating Emergency Knowledge for Kids (TREKK) Networks of Centres of Excellence of Canada (NCE). SDS designed and supervised all aspects of tool development and evaluation. LH co-designed and supervised the qualitative study involving interviews with parents and systematic review of parent experiences and information needs. Tony An developed the infographic. Kassi Shave conducted and analyzed qualitative interviews with parents. Anne Le (AL) conducted usability testing. AL analyzed usability data. All authors contributed to the writing of this technical report and provided substantial feedback. This work was funded by: Networks of Centres of Excellence Klassen, T., Hartling, L., Jabbour, M., Johnson, D., & Scott, S.D. (2015). Translating emergency knowledge for kids (TREKK). Networks of Centres of Excellence of Canada Knowledge Mobilization Renewal ($1,200,000). January 2016 – December 2019. Women and Children’s Health Research Institute (WCHRI) Scott, S.D & Hartling L. (2016). Translating Emergency Knowledge for Kids renewal. Women and Children’s Health Research Institute (matched dollars, $150,000). April 2016 – December 2019. This report should be cited as Le, A., Hartling, L., Scott, S.D. (2021). The development and usability testing of two arts-based knowledge translation tools for pediatric procedural pain. Technical Report. ECHO Research, University of Alberta. Available at: http://www.echokt.ca/research/technical-report s/
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,043 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».