Designing eHealth Interventions for Pediatric Emergency Departments: Protocol for a Usability Testing Study With Youth, Parent, and Clinician Participants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Usability tests provide important insight into user preferences, functional issues, and differences between target groups for health interventions and products. However, there is limited guidance on how to adapt the usability testing approach for a youth audience, especially for digital health interventions. OBJECTIVE: This protocol paper outlines a novel approach for conducting usability tests with a diverse audience of youth, parents, and clinicians in the development of 2 digital health tools for the pediatric emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: This paper outlines a protocol for usability testing as part of a broader study aimed at co-designing ED discharge communication tools with youth, parents, and clinicians. The broader study involved co-designing 2 digital tools: one for asthma and one for concussions. A multimethods approach to usability testing was used to assess the functionality of these tools through 2 rounds of testing. A mix of youth, parents, and ED clinicians were invited to participate in each round of usability testing. Participants were asked to provide feedback on the tools through quantitative surveys and open-ended qualitative questions. The usability testing approach was adapted to suit each target group, such as including a youth in the data collection process, to enhance the quality of the data. The severity of usability problems was analyzed following the first round of testing, and each tool was refined based on this feedback. The second round of usability tests involved collecting both qualitative and quantitative feedback on the revised tools. RESULTS: All usability data have been collected and are being analyzed. Outcomes will be disseminated through a subsequent publication. Results will include demographic characteristics from each user group from both rounds of testing, severity of usability scores, qualitative and quantitative feedback, and differences in test outcomes between each target group. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides novel guidance for conducting usability tests with youth participants when designing digital health tools. By using a comprehensive co-design and usability testing approach, we anticipate that final tools will be highly relevant to the end users and will lead to better uptake and patient outcomes when pilot-tested in future studies. The outlined approach may be adapted to different health care contexts for other youth participants. Further research should continue to explore ways to design usability tests that are suitable for youth audiences, as there is still a significant gap in the literature around this topic. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64350.
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 | 0,086 | 0,077 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,043 | 0,011 |
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 ».