MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W37687427

Benefits Realized through Usability Analysis of a Tele-nursing Call Management Software System at HealthLink BC.

2012· article· en· W37687427 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Hall, Amen S Lalli, André Kushniruk, Elizabeth M. Borycki

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityUsability engineeringComputer scienceSystem usability scaleUsability labUsability goalsSoftware engineeringUsability inspectionComponent-based usability testingCognitive walkthroughHeuristic evaluationHuman–computer interaction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we describe the analysis of a tele-nursing call management software system at HealthLink BC. Several methods of usability analysis were conducted in a process of continuous quality improvement. In the initial phase usability engineering methods were applied to assess simulated nurse interactions with the call system and decision support software. After modification of the software an evaluation of the resulting benefits of the usability engineering was carried out. Run and control charts were developed and the impact of the changes were assessed in the context of other ongoing changes occurring in the organization. It was found that call handle times were reduced after the software was modified based on the usability analyses, and the software was streamlined to require fewer steps to complete call management tasks. However, ongoing changes in business processes have underlined the need for continual usability analyses and system refinement even within mature systems.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207