How to use participatory design to develop an eHealth intervention to reduce preprocedural stress and anxiety among children visiting the hospital: The Hospital Hero app multi-study and pilot report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Medical procedures can cause considerable stress and anxiety among children. Current interventions mainly diminish stress and anxiety during procedures, while stress and anxiety often build up at home. Moreover, interventions often focus on either distraction or preparation. eHealth can combine multiple strategies and provide a low-cost solution that can be used outside the hospital. Objective To develop an eHealth solution to diminish preprocedural stress and anxiety, and to evaluate the app on use, usability and user experience in practice. We also aimed to gain in-depth insights in children's and caregivers' opinions and experiences to inform future improvements. Methods This is a multi-study report on the development (Study 1) and evaluation (Study 2) of a first version of the developed app. In study 1 we adopted a participatory design approach in which children's experiences were central to the design process. We performed an experience journey session with stakeholders (n = 13) to map the child's outpatient journey, identify pains and gains, and formulate the desired experience journey. Iterative development and testing with children (n = 8) and caregivers (n = 6) resulted in a working prototype. The prototype was tested with children, resulting in a first version of the Hospital Hero app. The app was evaluated on use, user-experience and usability during an eight-week pilot study in practice (Study 2). We triangulated data from online interviews with children and caregivers (n = 21) and online questionnaires (n = 46). Results Multiple stress and anxiety experience touchpoints were identified. The Hospital Hero app supports children in their hospital journey by facilitating preparation at home and providing distraction at the hospital. The pilot study showed that the app was evaluated positively on usability and user-experience and is considered feasible. Qualitative data showed five themes: (1) user-friendliness, (2) coherence and power of storytelling, (3) motivation and reward, (4) fit with real hospital journey, (5) procedural comfort. Discussion Using participatory design, we developed a child-centered solution that supports children in the entire hospital journey and may diminish preprocedural stress and anxiety. Future efforts should create a more tailored journey, define an optimal engagement window and formulate implementation strategies.
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 | 0.045 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".