Advance Care Planning Website for People With Dementia and Their Family Caregivers: Protocol for a Development and Usability Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Web-based tools for people with dementia and their family caregivers have considerably increased over the years and offer promising solutions to several unmet needs such as supporting self-care in daily life, facilitating treatment delivery, or ensuring their ability to communicate. The use of web-based tools in the field of advance care planning (ACP) for people with dementia and their family caregivers has yet to be explored and requires careful consideration, given the sensitive topic and the specific needs of people with dementia and their families. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the protocol for a study aiming to develop and simultaneously test the usability of an ACP website designed for, and with, people with dementia and their families. METHODS: The development of the website is based on a process map for the development of web-based decision support interventions and on the Medical Research Council framework for complex intervention development and evaluation. Additionally, we apply a user-centered approach in combination with patient and public involvement (PPI) throughout the development process. We describe our iterative development approach to the website. Participants and a PPI group give feedback on 4 prototypes of the ACP website. For each iteration, we aim to include 12 participants (3 people with dementia, 3 family caregivers, and 3 dyads) in usability testing. In the first 3 iterations, usability testing includes (1) a think-aloud exercise, (2) researcher observations, and (3) the System Usability Scale questionnaire. The last iteration of usability testing is composed of a semistructured interview assessing the layout, content, face validity, and readability of the website. Qualitative data from the think-aloud exercises and interviews are analyzed using thematic analysis. Mean scores are calculated for the System Usability Scale questionnaire. RESULTS: This study received approval from the Ethical Review Board of Brussels University Hospital of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Recruitment began in October 2021. The target date for paper submission of the results of the development and usability testing will be in 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The methods in this protocol describe a feasible and inclusive approach to the development of an ACP website together with people with dementia, their family caregivers, and other stakeholders. We provide a clear overview of how to combine PPI input and user-centered development methods, leading to a transparent and reliable development process. This protocol might stimulate the active participation of people with dementia, their caregivers, and regional stakeholders in future studies on web-based technologies. The results of this study will be used to refine the design and create a relevant and user-friendly ACP website that is ready to be tested in a larger evaluation study. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46935.
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 | 0,070 | 0,047 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,045 | 0,014 |
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 ».