MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970983217

Applying Human Factors Methods to Inform the Implementation of a Novel Medical Device

2019· article· en· W2970983217 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Chan, Gordon Jasechko

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsIsland HealthUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityComputer scienceTest (biology)Cognitive walkthroughSystem usability scaleUsability labUsability inspectionTask (project management)Pluralistic walkthroughHuman–computer interactionHeuristic evaluationUsability engineeringEngineeringSystems engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Usability testing was performed to identify usability problems with a medical device designed to detect respiratory depression. Personnel lacking formal human factors training developed and implemented the test plan. Quantitative usability test analysis involved measuring task completion time, success rate, and usability issue frequency. Qualitative data was collected via visual observations of the participants. Significant usability problems were identified with the following tasks: entering patient information, opening alarm settings, and adjusting alarms. The test results were used to improve the hospital’s clinical training.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207