MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391039326 · doi:10.2196/50839

mHealth App Usability Questionnaire for Stand-Alone mHealth Apps Used by Health Care Providers: Canadian French Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation (Part 1)

2024· article· en· W4391039326 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Julie Gagnon, Sebastian Probst, Julie Chartrand, Michelle Lalonde

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut du Savoir MontfortChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversité du Québec à RimouskiMontfort HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsUsabilitymHealthCLARITYContent validityInter-rater reliabilityPsychologyHealth careCertificationApplied psychologyMedicineMedical educationNursingPsychometricsComputer scienceClinical psychologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of health care professionals are using mobile apps. The mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (MAUQ) was designed to evaluate the usability of mobile health apps by patients and providers. However, this questionnaire is not available in French. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to translate (from English to Canadian French), cross-culturally adapt, and initiate the validation of the original version of MAUQ for stand-alone mobile health apps used by French-speaking health care providers. METHODS: A cross-cultural research study using a well-established method was conducted to translate MAUQ to Canadian French by certified translators and subsequently review it with a translation committee. It was then back translated to English. The back translations were compared with the original by the members of the committee to reach consensus regarding the prefinal version. A pilot test of the prefinal version was conducted with a sample of 49 potential users and 10 experts for content validation. RESULTS: The statements are considered clear, with interrater agreement of 99.14% among potential users and 90% among experts. Of 21 statements, 5 (24%) did not exceed the 80% interrater agreement of the experts regarding clarity. Following the revisions, interrater agreement exceeded 80%. The content validity index of the items varied from 0.90 to 1, and the overall content validity index was 0.981. Individual Fleiss multirater κ of each item was between 0.89 and 1, showing excellent agreement and increasing confidence in the questionnaire's content validity. CONCLUSIONS: This process of translation and cultural adaptation produced a new version of MAUQ that was validated for later use among the Canadian French-speaking population. An upcoming separate study will investigate the psychometric properties of the adapted questionnaire.

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)0.018
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 score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207