MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470360559 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-658-3-339

Educational Requirements for Mobile Applications in Nursing: Applying the User-Task-Context Matrix to Identify User Classes and Contexts of Use

2016· article· en· W2470360559 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth M. Borycki, André Kushniruk, Johanna Kaipio, Elizabeth Cummings

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrainstormingTask (project management)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)User requirements documentMobile deviceHealth careProcurementHuman–computer interactionMultimediaWorld Wide WebSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile applications are increasingly being deployed in healthcare and nurses are expected to use them during their education, practice and during training of patients. In this paper we describe how an approach to modelling user needs known as the user-task-context matrix has been applied to help guide in developing requirements for new mobile applications as well as for selecting applications to be used in different aspects of nursing and patient education. The approach involves first brainstorming the different classes of users of an application and then specifying possible tasks the application can be used for. In addition, different contexts of use of the application are then specified. Application of the method is described for improving understanding of user needs in both design and procurement of healthcare apps related to nursing education.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.343 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207