Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the Implementation of Infant Pain Practice Change (ImPaC) Resource
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Implementation of Infant Pain Practice (ImPaC) Resource is an eHealth tool designed to support infant pain practice change and ultimately enhance pain outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine users' perspectives on usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the ImPaC Resource. A descriptive prospective mixed-methods quality improvement study was conducted at a pediatric hospital in Canada. Individual "think aloud" interviews were conducted in a nonclinical environment (Phase A); "near live" testing was conducted while users interacted with the Resource in clinical setting (Phase B); individual "think-aloud" interviews were conducted in a nonclinical environment (Phase C). Outcomes included usability (System Usability Scale-SUS), acceptability (Acceptability E-Scale-AES), and feasibility. Interview transcripts were coded per a priori themes using deductive content analysis to create a structured categorization matrix. In Phase A, 10 clinicians interacted with the Resource in individual sessions. Median SUS score was 73.75 (range 52.5-92.5). In Phase B, four clinicians implemented the Resource in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) over 4 months. Median SUS score was 85 (82.5-92.5), and median AES score was 24 (21-24). In Phase C, an enhanced prototype was produced, and the same users from Phase B navigated the Resource in individual sessions. Median SUS score was 88.75 (85-95), and median AES score was 27.5 (25-29). Users considered the Resource as feasible for implementation, easy to navigate, engaging, intuitive, comprehensive, and evidence-based. Users highlighted the potential transferability of the Resource to other contexts and settings. The enhanced version of the ImPaC Resource was usable, acceptable, feasible, and met users' expectations and requirements. Results lead the way for evaluation of the Resource in a nationwide cluster randomized trial including 18 NICUs. This knowledge-rich platform is expected to enhance infant pain practices and outcomes in diverse clinical settings.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".