MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937419228 · doi:10.2196/12940

iCanCope With Pain: Cultural Adaptation and Usability Testing of a Self-Management App for Adolescents With Persistent Pain in Norway

2019· article· en· W2937419228 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Erik Grasaas, Liv Fegran, Sølvi Helseth, Jennifer Stinson, Santiago Martínez, Chitra Lalloo, Kristin Haraldstad

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsUsabilityThink aloud protocolApplied psychologyPsychologyContext (archaeology)MedicineComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persistent or chronic pain is a common health problem among adolescents. Thus, it is important that they receive evidence-based strategies for symptom management. iCanCope with Pain is a mobile phone app designed to help adolescents cope with chronic pain. The app comprises 5 evidence- and theory-based features: (I) symptom trackers for pain, sleep, mood, physical function, and energy; (II) goal setting to improve pain and function; (III) a coping toolbox of pain self-management strategies; (IV) social support; and (V) age-appropriate pain education. The iCanCope with Pain app is based on theory, identified health care needs, and current best practices for pain self-management. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to describe the translation and cultural adaptation of the app into the Norwegian context and evaluate the app's usability using a phased approach. METHODS: Phase 1 included translation and cultural adaptation of the app into the Norwegian context. This process used an expert panel of researchers and target group representatives who were responsible for the linguistic quality assurance and assessment. In phases 2 and 3 the app's usability was tested. For phase 2, the assessments of usability and user experiences included observation, the think aloud method, audiovisual recordings, questionnaires, and individual interviews in a laboratory setting. For phase 3, the assessment of usability and user experience over a 2-week home-based test included questionnaires and individual end-user interviews. Overall, app usability was determined based on ease of use, efficiency, and user satisfaction. Qualitative data were analyzed using deductive content analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative data. RESULTS: End users did not report any misunderstandings or discrepancies with the words or phrasing of the translated and culturally adapted app. Participants in both the laboratory- and home-based usability tests found the app self-explanatory and reported that all 5 of its features were easy to use. All tasks were completed within the allocated time frame (ie, efficiency), with few errors. Overall System Usability Scale scores were high, with average scores of 82 and 89 out of 100 from laboratory- and field-based tests, respectively. Participants liked the idea of a social support function (feature IV), although qualitative and internet server data revealed that this feature was rarely used. CONCLUSIONS: This study described the cultural and linguistic adaptation and usability testing of the Norwegian version of the iCanCope with Pain app. High user satisfaction, ease of use, efficiency, and only minor errors cumulatively indicated that no changes to the app were needed, with the exception of facilitating user interaction within the social support feature. The app will be used in an upcoming randomized controlled trial with a larger sample.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207