| Literature DB >> 28867782 |
Ian Pike1,2, Jennifer Smith3, Samar Al-Hajj4, Pamela Fuselli5, Alison Macpherson6.
Abstract
Child and youth injury prevention research in Canada has lagged behind other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations, despite existing surveillance systems and longitudinal data. A critical need to improve access to the available data, as well as need to tailor its display and interpretation, was identified by injury prevention stakeholders involved in research, policy, and practice. The Canadian Atlas of Child and Youth Injury Prevention ("the Atlas") was developed to address this need. Following a series of iterative consultation meetings and a pilot testing session, the Atlas was scaled up with national data. Two testing sessions were held to evaluate the tools. The Atlas is comprised of three main components: data, indicators, and visualizations. The accessibility of the dashboard is enhanced by customization of data visualizations and data outputs to suit the user's needs. Overall feedback indicated that the tools were easy to use, and that the interface was intuitive and visually appealing. The Canadian Atlas of Child and Youth Injury Prevention provides readily accessible information to injury prevention practitioners, policy makers and researchers, helping to chart pathways to success in improving the child and youth injury prevention system in Canada.Entities:
Keywords: children and youth; injury surveillance; knowledge translation
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28867782 PMCID: PMC5615519 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14090982
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Atlas and dashboard timeline.
Figure 2Dashboard output in graph display.
Figure 3iDOT output in table display.
Qualitative results of the usability testing sessions
| Dimension | Dashboard | Insights | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Learnability | Easy to learn and easy to go back and fix errors | Display can be visually overwhelming, but users were able to complete the tasks easily | Understandable information, definition of an “indicator” was still challenging for some |
| Intuitiveness | Very intuitive, as the format is similar to other form-based tools | Graphs and filters were easy to use and explore | The information was easily understood, although definition of “indicator” was still challenging for some |
| Efficiency | There is a period of learning how to use the tool—once this is achieved, use is simple | Information regarding how and when to use the tool is needed to support users and improve efficiency | This section is content based, so no difficulties with efficiency |
| Preciseness | Some confusion about how to achieve a breakdown using “cause” and “subcause” of injury | Some technical issues identified and resolved between testing sessions | Technical issue with PYLL indicator resolved prior to going live |
| Fault Tolerance | Easy to go back and fix errors | Some technical issues identified and resolved between testing sessions | Search function was useful |
| Memorability | Able to repeat a task easily | Able to repeat a task easily, although “reset” button needed to be relocated | Very easy to repeat the tasks |
| Affordance | Buttons to select “cause” or “subcause” of injury not immediately apparent | Once the user is familiar, the tool is easy to use | No issues with navigation identified |