HUMAN-CENTERED PHONE OXIMETER INTERFACE DESIGN FOR THE OPERATING ROOM - Pulse Oximeter Interfaced to a Mobile Device for Anesthesia Monitoring in the Developing World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile phones offer huge potential as platforms for clinical decision making in resource-poor and remote areas. We present methods for the development of a human-centered interface for anesthesia monitoring that is targeted to remote operating rooms in developing countries. The Phone Oximeter is compatible with major PC and mobile phone operating systems and is optimized for small phone screens. It displays vital physiological parameters in the corresponding clinical colours. Combined with an easily identifiable icon, this guarantees that accessibility is language-independent. To evaluate the acceptance and usability of the initial prototype of the Phone Oximeter, the Think Aloud process while completing a specific Task List, followed by the Mobile Phone Usability Questionnaire (MPUQ) were tested on 20 subjects with varying medical and mobile phone experience. The acceptance rate of 81.9 % from the MPUQ questionnaire clearly demonstrates the usability of the Phone Oximeter. The incorporation of the most relevant errors and complaints into the design of the next iteration of the Phone Oximeter prototype enhanced its capabilities further.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".