This evaluation process utilizes user-centered design (UCD) methods, with the testing of the CDSS conducted in phases of developmental iterations. The UCD methods include formative usability sessions (12 (link), 31 (link)), cognitive walk-through/think-aloud procedures (5 (link), 32 (link)), iterative development with end-users, and utilization of both qualitative and quantitative methods of inquiry (31 (link), 33 ). As part of UCD, the iterative development of the CDSS involves continuous collaboration with CAMHS clinicians. The specific methods and the development plan are detailed in the IDDEAS project protocol (11 (link)). The present study serves as the first usability test, using UCD methods to investigate Norwegian CAMHS clinicians’ perceptions of the usability, utility, and overall functionality of the IDDEAS prototype.
Evaluating the IDDEAS Decision Support System for Norwegian CAMHS
This evaluation process utilizes user-centered design (UCD) methods, with the testing of the CDSS conducted in phases of developmental iterations. The UCD methods include formative usability sessions (12 (link), 31 (link)), cognitive walk-through/think-aloud procedures (5 (link), 32 (link)), iterative development with end-users, and utilization of both qualitative and quantitative methods of inquiry (31 (link), 33 ). As part of UCD, the iterative development of the CDSS involves continuous collaboration with CAMHS clinicians. The specific methods and the development plan are detailed in the IDDEAS project protocol (11 (link)). The present study serves as the first usability test, using UCD methods to investigate Norwegian CAMHS clinicians’ perceptions of the usability, utility, and overall functionality of the IDDEAS prototype.
Corresponding Organization : Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Other organizations : University of Chicago, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, St Olav's University Hospital, RWTH Aachen University
Variable analysis
- Not explicitly mentioned
- Not explicitly mentioned
- Not explicitly mentioned
- No positive or negative controls were explicitly mentioned in the input text.
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!