User-Centred Design of a Web Interface for a Bibliographic Database on Women’s Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Web usability design guidelines derived from a synthesis of the literature were used to evaluate two Web search interfaces for a bibliographic database on women’s health information resources. The current interface is hosted on the Ontario Women’s Health Council Secretariat website (OWHC). The OWHC is an agency of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ontario, Canada). The new interface will be hosted on the Resources section of the Women’s Health Matters (WHM) website, a bilingual Canadian consumer health portal on women’s health issues. Six criteria for effective web interface design were identified: visual design; information architecture; navigation; search; universal usability, and help. Prior to conducting a literature-based evaluation of the two search interfaces, a series of evaluations were conducted with expertreviewers, IT experts and WHM content staff from Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre. Findings from both types of evaluation were compared and deemed to be similar. The current and future web search interfaces are aesthetically pleasing and offer standard search fields for conducting basic searches on the consumer health database. TheOWHC search interface possesses one advantage over the prototype WHM interface; an alphabetically arranged list of health topics. However, the prototype WHM search interface offers more search options in both the basic and advanced search interfaces. Both the current OWHC search interface and prototype WHM interface suffer from inconsistency and/or lack of clarity in terms of labelling search fields and their options. Furthermore, the complexity of the WHM advanced searchinterface, in terms of number of search categories, impairs usability. Modifications to the prototype WHM search interface have been subsequently implemented by Women’s Health Matters before the official launch of this consumer health database and its web interface on the WHM site in late 2003. Thus, two divergent methodological approaches can provide similar insights into effective web design and lead to improvements in the usability of web search interfaces.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.041 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".