Designing a Personalized Health Dashboard: Interdisciplinary and Participatory Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Within the Dutch Child Health Care (CHC), an online tool (360° CHILD-profile) is designed to enhance prevention and transformation toward personalized health care. From a personalized preventive perspective, it is of fundamental importance to timely identify children with emerging health problems interrelated to multiple health determinants. While digitalization of children's health data is now realized, the accessibility of data remains a major challenge for CHC professionals, let alone for parents/youth. Therefore, the idea was initiated from CHC practice to develop a novel approach to make relevant information accessible at a glance. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the stepwise development of a dashboard, as an example of using a design model to achieve visualization of a comprehensive overview of theoretically structured health data. METHODS: Developmental process is based on the nested design model with involvement of relevant stakeholders in a real-life context. This model considers immediate upstream validation within 4 cascading design levels: Domain Problem and Data Characterization, Operation and Data Type Abstraction, Visual Encoding and Interaction Design, and Algorithm Design. This model also includes impact-oriented downstream validation, which can be initiated after delivering the prototype. RESULTS: A comprehensible 360° CHILD-profile is developed: an online accessible visualization of CHC data based on the theoretical concept of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. This dashboard provides caregivers and parents/youth with a holistic view on children's health and "entry points" for preventive, individualized health plans. CONCLUSIONS: Describing this developmental process offers guidance on how to utilize the nested design model within a health care context.
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 | 0.047 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".