User and Usability Testing of a Web-Based Genetics Education Tool for Parkinson Disease: Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic testing is essential to identify research participants for clinical trials enrolling people with Parkinson disease (PD) carrying a variant in the glucocerebrosidase (GBA) or leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2) genes. The limited availability of professionals trained in neurogenetics or genetic counseling is a major barrier to increased testing. Telehealth solutions to increase access to genetics education can help address issues around counselor availability and offer options to patients and family members. OBJECTIVE: As an alternative to pretest genetic counseling, we developed a web-based genetics education tool focused on GBA and LRRK2 testing for PD called the Interactive Multimedia Approach to Genetic Counseling to Inform and Educate in Parkinson's Disease (IMAGINE-PD) and conducted user testing and usability testing. The objective was to conduct user and usability testing to obtain stakeholder feedback to improve IMAGINE-PD. METHODS: Genetic counselors and PD and neurogenetics subject matter experts developed content for IMAGINE-PD specifically focused on GBA and LRRK2 genetic testing. Structured interviews were conducted with 11 movement disorder specialists and 13 patients with PD to evaluate the content of IMAGINE-PD in user testing and with 12 patients with PD to evaluate the usability of a high-fidelity prototype according to the US Department of Health and Human Services Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines. Qualitative data analysis informed changes to create a final version of IMAGINE-PD. RESULTS: Qualitative data were reviewed by 3 evaluators. Themes were identified from feedback data of movement disorder specialists and patients with PD in user testing in 3 areas: content such as the topics covered, function such as website navigation, and appearance such as pictures and colors. Similarly, qualitative analysis of usability testing feedback identified additional themes in these 3 areas. Key points of feedback were determined by consensus among reviewers considering the importance of the comment and the frequency of similar comments. Refinements were made to IMAGINE-PD based on consensus recommendations by evaluators within each theme at both user testing and usability testing phases to create a final version of IMAGINE-PD. CONCLUSIONS: User testing for content review and usability testing have informed refinements to IMAGINE-PD to develop this focused, genetics education tool for GBA and LRRK2 testing. Comparison of this stakeholder-informed intervention to standard telegenetic counseling approaches is ongoing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".