Our methods connect a concrete decision with suitable observations, traceable data and participants’ perspectives. The following components serve different purposes.
NAD structures discussions about measurement: which decision needs data, what accuracy is sufficient, and how long should observation continue? We connect these questions to a comparison, an analysis criterion and a review point.
FHIR provides resources for structured health information, including Observation, Goal, Task and Consent. For each flow, we specify profiles, terminology, provenance and permissions and test sample imports.
Read source ↗VITALISE addresses harmonisation of Living Lab services and procedures. We use it to describe access, study planning, participation, delivery and documentation across sites.
Read source ↗The ICF connects functioning with activities, participation and environment. We describe each task with its setting, aids and the support actually required.
Read source ↗The MRC framework connects development, feasibility, evaluation and implementation with context and programme theory. For the ZHV, we examine housing, training, technology and relief separately.
Read source ↗NASSS examines adoption, non-use, abandonment and sustainability of health technologies across people, organisations and context. We therefore record maintenance, additional work and reasons for non-use.
Read source ↗We document a contribution from the identified problem through the change to a new task test. New users test the revised version. This lets us examine which participation improves a solution and at what effort.
We link repeated task observation with user reports and care events. Goal attainment, required help, burden and use each retain their own trajectory. Comparisons are specified in advance; missing data remain distinct from negative outcomes.
Which methodological question does your project raise?
We look forward to talking with you.
Alika
Deutsch
Português
Español
Română
Bosanski