MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Usability Testing of a Prototype Multi-User Telehealth Kiosk

2015· article· en· W192219853 on OpenAlexaff
Karen L. Courtney, Judith T. Matthews, Julie M. McMillan, Asim Smailagic, Daniel P. Siewiorek

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractive kioskUsabilityTelehealthComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionUser interfaceUsability labUsability inspectionWorld Wide WebMultimediaWeb usabilityUsability engineeringTelemedicineHealth careOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overall purpose of this study was to learn how community-dwelling older adults would interact with our prototype multi-user telehealth kiosk and their views about its usability. Seven subjects participated in laboratory-based usability sessions to evaluate the physical design, appearance, functionality and perceived ease of use of a multi-user telehealth kiosk prototype. During usability testing participants recommended 18 new features (29% of comments), identified 15 software errors (23% of comments) and 29 user interface errors (47% of comments).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207