A Web-Based Application for Complex Health Care Populations: User-Centered Design Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although eHealth technology makes it possible to improve the management of complex health care systems and follow up on chronic patients, it is not without challenges, thus requiring the development of efficient programs and graphic user interface (GUI) features. Similar information technology tools are crucial, as health care populations are going to have to endure social distancing measures in the forthcoming months and years. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to provide adequate and personalized support to complex health care populations by developing a specific web-based mobile app. The app is designed around the patient and adapted to specific groups, for example, people with complex or rare diseases, autism, or disabilities (especially among children) as well as Alzheimer or senile dementia. The app's core features include the collection, labeling, analysis, and sorting of clinical data. Furthermore, it authorizes a network of people around the patient to securely access the data contained in his or her electronic health record. METHODS: The application was designed according to the paradigms of patient-centered care and user-centered design (UCD). It considers the patient as the main empowered and motivating factor in the management of his or her well-being. Implementation was informed through a family needs and technology perception assessment. We used 3 interdisciplinary focus groups and 2 assessment surveys to study the contexts of app use, subpopulation management, and preferred functions. Finally, we developed an observational study involving 116 enrolled patients and 253 system users, followed by 2 feedback surveys to evaluate the performance and impact of the app. RESULTS: In the validated general GUI, we developed 10 user profiles with different privacy settings. We tested 81 functions and studied a modular structure based on disease or medical area. This allowed us to identify replicable methods to be applied to module design. The observational study not only showed good family and community engagement but also revealed some limitations that need to be addressed. In total, 42 of 51 (82%) patients described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied. Health care providers reported facilitated communication with colleagues and the need to support data quality. CONCLUSIONS: The experimented solution addressed some of the health system challenges mentioned by the World Health Organization: usability appears to be significantly improved when the GUI is designed according to patients' UCD mental models and when new media and medical literacy are promoted. This makes it possible to maximize the impact of eHealth products, thereby overcoming some crucial gaps reported in the literature. Two main features seemed to have potential benefit compared with other eHealth products: the modeling, within the app, of both the formal and informal health care support networks and the modular structure allowing for comorbidity management, both of which require further implementation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".