MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3206750868 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053119

Creation of an electronic patient-reported outcome measure platform Voxe: a mixed methods study protocol in paediatric solid organ transplantation

2021· article· en· W3206750868 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha J. Anthony, Sarah J. Pol, Jia Lin, Melanie Barwick, Michael Brudno, Dorin Manase, Rulan S. Parekh, Amanda Silva, Jennifer Stinson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health Ontario
FundersHealth CanadaHospital for Sick ChildrenAstellas Pharma
KeywordsPromUsabilityMedicineProtocol (science)Think aloud protocolPatient-reported outcomePatient satisfactionTask (project management)Health careFocus groupFeelingNursingMedical educationComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Alternative medicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide an opportunity for meaningful patient engagement and shared decision-making. The objective of this research programme is to improve health outcomes for paediatric solid organ transplant patients by implementing PROMs into clinical care. The current study aims to create Voxe, a paediatric user-centred electronic PROM platform, by engaging patients and healthcare providers throughout the design and development process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The creation of Voxe will occur over two phases that build on previous research. The user interface design phase employs a 'user-centric' approach to identify end-users' needs and iteratively refine the look and layout of Voxe to meet these needs. Transplant recipients, aged 10-17, and healthcare providers will participate in three rounds of testing (24 participants total). Participants will: (1) complete task-based activities (outcomes-effectiveness and efficiency), (2) complete questionnaires (outcome-satisfaction) and (3) participate in a semi-structured interview. The following phase involves software development and Voxe usability testing. Transplant recipients, aged 8-17, and healthcare providers will participate in four rounds of iterative testing (24-40 participants total). The think-aloud technique will be employed, and participants will describe their thoughts and feelings while interacting with a Voxe prototype. Participants will: (1) log into Voxe and complete tasks (outcomes-time on task, successful task completion, frequency of critical and non-critical errors and error-free rate), (2) complete questionnaires (outcome-satisfaction) and (3) participate in a semi-structured interview. Findings will result in the creation and launch of a user-centred electronic PROM platform. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval has been provided by The Hospital for Sick Children. This research is critical to answering methodological and operational questions to inform Voxe implementation in paediatric clinical settings and facilitate PROM data collection. Future investigations will include an implementation-effectiveness evaluation.

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)0.157
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1570.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicMental Health and Patient Involvement→French-language works237,207→