MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394061150 · doi:10.2196/50086

Gamification Approach to Provide Support About the Deferral Experience in Blood Donation: Design and Feasibility Study

2024· article· en· W4394061150 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roberto Espinoza Chamorro, Luciano H. O. Santos, Yukiko Mori, Chang Liu, Goshiro Yamamoto, Tomohiro Kuroda

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeferralBlood donorDonationMedicineDesign studyIntensive care medicineComputer scienceEngineeringBusinessPolitical scienceImmunologySystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have examined the impact of deferral on the motivation of prospective blood donors, proposing various policies and strategies to support individuals who undergo this experience. However, existing information and communications technology systems focused on blood donation have not yet integrated these ideas or provided options to assist with the deferral experience. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to propose an initial gamified design aimed at mitigating the impact of the deferral experience by addressing the drivers of awareness and knowledge, interaction and validation, and motivation. Additionally, the study explores the feasibility of implementing such a system for potential users. METHODS: We conducted a literature review focusing on the dynamics of motivation and intention related to blood donation, as well as the deferral situation and its impact on citizens. Through this review, we identified weak donor identity, lack of knowledge, and reduced motivation as key factors requiring support from appropriate interventions. These factors were then defined as our key drivers. Taking these into account, we proposed a gamification approach that incorporates concepts from the MDA framework. The aim is to stimulate the aforementioned drivers and expand the concept of contribution and identity in blood donation. For a preliminary evaluation, we designed a prototype to collect feedback on usability, usefulness, and interest regarding a potential implementation of our proposed gamification approach. RESULTS: Among the participants, a total of 11 citizens interacted with the app and provided feedback through our survey. They indicated that interacting with the app was relatively easy, with an average score of 4.13 out of 5 when considering the 11 tasks of interaction. The SUS results yielded a final average score of 70.91 from the participants' answers. Positive responses were received when participants were asked about liking the concept of the app (3.82), being likely to download it (3.55), and being likely to recommend it to others (3.64). Participants expressed positivity about the implementation of the design but also highlighted current shortcomings and suggested possible improvements in both functionality and usability. CONCLUSIONS: Although deferral is a common issue in blood donation, there is a missed opportunity in existing ICT services regarding how to effectively handle such experiences. Our proposed design and implementation seem to have captured the interest of prospective users due to its perceived positive usefulness and potential. However, further confirmation is needed. Improving the design of activities that currently rely heavily on extrinsic motivation elements and integrating more social components to create an enhanced activity loop for intrinsic motivation could further increase the value of the proposed project. Future research could involve conducting a more specialized and longitudinal design evaluation with a larger sample size.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicBlood donation and transfusion practicesFrench-language works237,207