MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413772496 · doi:10.2196/58909

Clinical System for Mood Disorder Care in Córdoba, Colombia: Participatory Design and Scenario-Based Usability Evaluation Study

2025· article· en· W4413772496 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ever A. Torres-Silva, Juan Gaviria, Eider Pereira-Montiel, David Andrés Montoya Arenas, José F. Flórez-Arango

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintUsabilityMoodCitizen journalismParticipatory designPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebPsychiatryHuman–computer interactionEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mood disorders are among the leading causes of disability worldwide and present a growing public health concern. In Córdoba, Colombia, suicide rates have risen significantly in recent years, exposing structural gaps in mental health care delivery. Digital health solutions and telehealth interventions can expand access to early detection, referral, and monitoring of patients in underserved regions. However, their effectiveness depends on rigorous and diverse evaluations to ensure adoption and sustainability. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the usability of a clinical telehealth system for mood disorder care developed through participatory design, with emphasis on user-centered functionality and workload analysis. METHODS: The system was designed through 2 iterative development cycles, followed by a scenario-based usability evaluation. A functional Domain Ontology was constructed to prioritize 8 core functionalities, including telecounseling, a georeferenced institutional directory, hotline services, patient self-report tools, educational content, forums, and a population dashboard. Thirty participants representing patients, caregivers, clinical staff, and administrative personnel were recruited through convenience sampling. Usability was assessed through cognitive walk-throughs, the NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Task Load Index, and the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 34 usability sessions and 223 task-level workload assessments were conducted across 2 evaluation cycles. The system demonstrated high usability, with overall Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire scores of 2.2 in cycle 1 and 2.3 in cycle 2. Interfaces prioritized for patients and clinical staff achieved better evaluations (average 1.9-2.0) than administrative interfaces (average 3.0). Workload analysis indicated improvements between cycles, particularly for patient-centered tasks, with mental workload as the most significant source of cognitive demand. Twenty-three critical issues (9 system errors and 14 design flaws) were identified and corrected between cycles, leading to measurable usability gains. CONCLUSIONS: The participatory and scenario-based approach facilitated early identification of usability challenges and supported iterative refinement of the system. Results suggest that the system is usable, acceptable, and effective in reducing workload for key user groups, particularly patients and clinicians. The findings reinforce the value of participatory methodologies in digital mental health and highlight the need to prioritize patient-facing interfaces. Future research should extend evaluations to mobile platforms and larger populations to support scalability and integration into regional mental health services.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.322
GPT teacher head0.618
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→