Perceived usability and acceptability of the My-Hip Fracture risk communication tool from the perspective of academic clinicians
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the usability and acceptability of My-Hip Fracture (My-HF), a web application that assists providers in delivering individualized prognostic information to patients hospitalized for hip fracture (HF). We observed a sample of 16 clinicians as they navigated My-HF. We then administered a structured questionnaire and conducted semi-structured interviews to explore participants' opinions about the app's content and the feasibility of incorporating the app into clinical workflows. Clinicians required a median of 2-min and 45 s to navigate through the app. Nearly all participants indicated that My-HF was easy to use and would be useful for their practice. About half of participants had suggestions for additional useful peri-operative content. A few expressed concerns about communicating mortality risk. About half expressed concerns about how My-HF might be integrated into existing clinical workflows. Though clinicians rated My-HF high on usefulness in a structured usability questionnaire, qualitative interviews identified a number of suggestions for optimizing integration into clinical practice. Creating shared goals, establishing a decision coach, and developing a framework of communication across care settings could facilitate integration of My-HF by the multidisciplinary HF team. My-Hip Fracture is a unique web application which provides personalized prognostic information to patients and families after HF. My-HF has potential to facilitate informed decision-making between clinicians and patients, but adaptations will be necessary to enhance its usability. • My-Hip Fracture app helps clinicians deliver prognostic information after hip fracture. • We had clinicians evaluate the usability and acceptability of My-Hip Fracture. • Despite high usability ratings, clinicians questioned the feasibility of integration. • Creating shared communication goals and using a decision coach could help. • Mechanisms to facilitate communication across time and settings are also needed.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it