MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PROTOTIPAGEM DO APLICATIVO MÓVEL MEMO COM UTILIZAÇÃO DE HEURÍSTICAS DE INTERFACE PARA PESSOA IDOSA

2025· article· W4415814676 on OpenAlexaff
Dayane Aparecida Scaramal, Sylvie Belleville, Bobby Gilbert, Isabelle Patriciá Freitas Soares Chariglione, Maria do Carmo Fernandez Lourenço Haddad, André Estevam Jaques, Rosângela Aparecida Pimenta Ferrari, Mara Solange Gomes Dellaroza

Bibliographic record

VenueTexto & Contexto - Enfermagem · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsClinique Neuro-OutaouaisInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterface (matter)User interfaceInterface designProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUMO Objetivo: construir o protótipo de aplicativo móvel do treino cognitivo canadense Méthode d’Entrainement pour une Mémoire Optimale, com interface e design específicos para pessoas idosas. Método: estudo metodológico de produção tecnológica, incorporando heurísticas de interface de pequenas telas sensíveis ao toque para pessoas idosas, combinadas ao Paradigma da Prototipação, sistematizado em: (1) comunicação; (2) projeto rápido e modelagem; (3) construção do protótipo, e (4) emprego, entrega e realimentação. O processo de prototipagem aconteceu entre fevereiro de 2022 e agosto de 2023. Resultados: o protótipo incluiu 216 telas, divididas em seis sessões, cada uma contendo atividades de treinamento cognitivo e informações sobre envelhecimento e cognição. Um mapa conceitual foi criado, abrangendo todos os conteúdos, seguidos pela elaboração de wireframe das telas, permitindo a aplicação das heurísticas de interface, incluindo aspectos cognitivos, visuais, entrada de dados, toque e geracionais. Conclusão: a abordagem adotada, aliada às heurísticas de interface para a população idosa, resultou na criação de um protótipo exclusivo, cujos aspectos foram meticulosamente planejados e refinados para garantir uma experiência de usuário fluida e sem obstáculos, contribuindo para reduzir o gap de acessibilidade de recursos tecnológicos para estes indivíduos.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venueTexto & Contexto - EnfermagemSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207