Viewing the Learning Process: Assessment Via Usability Testing

Learning through Computer-Based Activities Provides a Multi-Modal Approach in Which the User Can Select the Educational Media and Process. Effective Development of These Activities Requires an Understanding of User Interactivity. Traditional Assessment, Such as Test Scores and Subjective Surveys, Looks at End Results and Attitudes. This Method Does Not Monitor the Learning Process. in Particular Developer Needs to Accommodate Diverse Usage Preferences and Choices. Hence, Assessment Should Involve Usability Measures that Are Quantitative and Qualitative. Usability Testing Records Usage Patterns and User Reactions. a Usability Laboratory Was Created at the University of Missouri-Rolla. It is Supplements the Traditional Assessment for Hypermedia Tutorials and Virtual Laboratories. the Laboratory is Designed to Provide Information on User Choices and Comfort. the Test Setup Provides (1) a Time Record and Progression of Intermediate Steps and (2) Visual and Auditory Clues to Subjective Factors. the Quantitative Measures Indicate How Efficiently and Accurately a User Comprehends and Navigates. the Qualitative Measures Indicate Satisfaction and Frustration during the Learning Process. an Example Test of a Prototype Virtual Laboratory is Described

Interactive Virtual Laboratory for Experience with a Smart Bridge Test

Virtual laboratory experiments can be cost effective, convenient instructional resources that have appeal to a wide range of learning styles. Expensive, time-consuming laboratory tests can be experienced repeatedly and remotely using interactive simulations and original video footage or animations. A virtual experiment can incorporate meaningful exercises, procedural options, and background hyperlinks to create a comprehensive hands on environment. Also, it may be used as preliminary training for the actual experiment. An interactive LabVIEW-based laboratory for a load test simulation of an existing demonstration bridge was created. This smart truss bridge is instrumented with fiber optic strain sensors situated on the trusses. The user interface incorporates a synchronized image of the loaded bridge and a graph of the associated strains. A static display mode allows the choice of load placement and of data for single or multiple sensors. A continuous display mode shows the dynamic images of the bridge and strains on truss members. Options include the display of experimental data or of theoretical calculations. Hyperlinks give access to information on the sensors, the bridge construction, and the theoretical analysis. The program interface can also be used in the actual experiment to display data. The intended application is a laboratory for an interdisciplinary class on smart materials and sensors. The Lab VIEW program can be easily modified for tests on other structures such as a full-scale bridge

Reduction of late stillbirth with the introduction of fetal movement information and guidelines – a clinical quality improvement

We have performed a full cross-validation of this clinical Femina data collection against the routinely collected data of the Medical Birth Registry of Norway to validate the estimates of reduced mortality in the total population. The original estimate of fewer deaths during the intervention with OR 0.7 remains virtually unchanged for the original data collection

WWW Instructional Documentation for the Development of a Smart Composite Bridge

An Instructional World-Wide-Web (WWW) Site for a Smart Composite Bridge Provides Technical Documentation to a Diverse Audience Including Professional and Student Users. It Describes a Prototype Bridge Project that Demonstrates the Use of Fibre-Reinforced-Composites and Smart Sensing Techniques for Civil Engineering Applications. This Smart Composite Bridge is a Long-Term Technological Demonstration for Industry and an Interdisciplinary Field Laboratory for Students. the Site Content Includes Live Images, Technical Details, Associated Publications, Manufacturing Protocols and Developmental Testing. the Site Objectives Are to Provide Current Information, to Organise Progressive Levels of Detail and to Exploit WWW Instructional Capabilities. Clear Organisation, Navigational Aids, Supplementary Helps and Content Layering Balances the User Needs (1) for Simplicity through Consistent Presentation and Usability and (2) for Complexity through User-Centred Options and Multimedia. This Instructional Tool Models Effective Communication of Research to Industry and the Classroom. It Shows How Site Design Can Accommodate Diverse Needs of Information Delivery

Development and Delivery of an Interactive Web-Based Seminar

As technology improves our ability to exchange information, the goals of information exchange become more complex. Traditional means of transferring information, such as a conference or a journal article, may not be sufficient under some conditions. An audience may be spread over the globe, the information may not present well in a written format, more time may be needed than is allowed at a conference, there may be requirements to archive data so it can be viewed at a later date. These problems can be solved using the internet as an information transfer medium. A web seminar with live streaming audio satisfies these goals and can be implemented with minimal cost and effort. In the past year, we developed and delivered a web-based seminar from the University of Missouri-Rolla to help disseminate material we created as part of an NSF-CCLI grant. As few ready-made, affordable options existed for delivering a web seminar at that time, we explored several methods of developing and delivering the seminar ourselves

A Bayesian reanalysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial

Background Timing of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zero–one inflated beta regression. Results The posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI] − 3.30%; 3.40%], − 0.39% [95% CrI − 3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrI − 2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference of − 3.55 days [95% CrI − 6.38; − 0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrI − 1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66. Conclusions In a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation