Cited by 17Usability and User Interface DesignHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The Development of Delta: Using Agile to Develop a Decision Aid for Pediatric Oncology Clinical Trial Enrollment

Open access
Robertson, Eden G, Wakefield, Claire E, Cohn, Richard J, O'Brien, Tracey, Ziegler, David S, Fardell, Joanna E·2018·JMIR Research Protocols

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The internet is increasingly being used to disseminate health information. Given the complexity of pediatric oncology clinical trials, we developed Delta, a Web-based decision aid to support families deciding whether or not to enroll their child with cancer in a clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: This paper details the Agile development process of Delta and user testing results of Delta. METHODS: Development was iterative and involved 5 main stages: a requirements analysis, planning, design, development, and user testing. For user testing, we conducted 13 eye-tracking analyses and think-aloud interviews with health care professionals (n=6) and parents (n=7). RESULTS: Results suggested that there was minimal rereading of content and a high level of engagement in content. However, there were some navigational problems. Participants reported high acceptability (12/13) and high usability of the website (8/13). CONCLUSIONS: Delta demonstrates the utility for the use of Agile in the development of a Web-based decision aid for health purposes. Our study provides a clear step-by-step guide to develop a Web-based psychosocial tool within the health setting.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/resprot.9258

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [19]Abrahamsson P Salo O Ronkainen J Warsta J VTT 2002 2018-04-12 Espoo, VTT Publications Agile software development methods: review and analysis http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2002/P478.pdf
  2. [21]Olsson HH Alahyari H Bosch J Climbing the Stairway to Heaven--A Mulitiple-Case Study Exploring Barriers in the Transition from Agile Development towards Continuous Deployment of Software 2012 09 05 38th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications September 5-8, 2012 Cesme, Izmir, Turkey
  3. [35]Pignone M Fagerlin A Abhyankar P Col N Feldman-Stewart D Kryworuchko J Levin CA Pieterse A Reyna V Stiggelbout A Scherer L Wills C Witteman H International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration 2012 2018-04-12 Clarifying and expressing values (2012 Update of the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration's Background Document) http://ipdas.ohri.ca/ipdas-chapter-d.pdf
  4. [48]Coulter A Engaging Patients in Healthcare 2006 Berkshire McGraw-Hill Education

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robertson, E. G., Wakefield, C. E., Cohn, R. J., O'Brien, T., Ziegler, D. S., & Fardell, J. E.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
JMIR Research Protocols
Published
2018-05-04
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
e119
ISSN
1929-0748 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2800684347
Cited by
17
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5
FWCI
2.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Research Protocols (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Cancer Institute NSW (10/TPG/1-13)
  • Kids Cancer Alliance
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1067501)
  • Cancer Council NSW (PG16‐02)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
web-based decision aid, pediatric oncology, clinical trial recruitment, agile software development, parents of children with cancer, eye tracking, think-aloud interviews, usability, acceptability, health information dissemination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review