Development of an Online Dance Injury Surveillance System (ODISS): A Delphi Consensus, Usability, and Feasibility Study.

IF 1.1 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
Amitoj Singh Thind, Emre Ilhan, Joel Thomas Fuller
{"title":"Development of an Online Dance Injury Surveillance System (ODISS): A Delphi Consensus, Usability, and Feasibility Study.","authors":"Amitoj Singh Thind, Emre Ilhan, Joel Thomas Fuller","doi":"10.1177/1089313X251323157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To develop an optimal outline for an online dance injury surveillance system (ODISS) based on expert consensus from a Delphi survey and evaluate the system's usability and feasibility within a fictional folk-dance academy setting.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Dance is characterized by intensive training and performance, which can elevate susceptibility to injuries. Robust surveillance systems are required to understand and mitigate this injury risk. Current systems exhibit limitations and lack uniformity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Delphi panel of 35 stage 1 experts were recruited through snowball sampling from online professional networks, professional dance associations, organizations, and academies. Inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, fluent in English, and worked as dance academics or researchers, clinicians, instructors, managers, or competitive or professional dancers. These stage 1 experts were provided with a preliminary outline of a dance injury surveillance system that covered 6 domains: dancer demographics and screening, exposure monitoring, injury identification and classification, injury management, dancer recovery and system access. Stage 1 experts then voted on the importance of and provided feedback on different design elements within each domain across 2 Delphi survey rounds to determine a consensus system design outline. A pilot system was then developed and evaluated by stage 2 experts, who were end-users and included dance instructors and administrators from various dance academies/institutions recruited through direct invitations. These stage 2 experts utilized the System Usability Scale (SUS) and System Feasibility Measure (SFM) based on application to a fictional folk-dance injury scenario.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In survey round 1, the stage 1 experts reached consensus to include 30 elements and exclude 3 elements and demonstrated mixed opinion on 30 elements that were revised into 14 elements for further consideration in round 2. All but 1 element reached consensus to include after round 2. System testing demonstrated low marginal usability (SUS score: 58.2% ± 11.6%). Stage 2 experts agreed or strongly agreed the system was feasible for 86.7% ± 10.3% of SFM statement ratings. Key areas for improvement identified from stage 2 expert feedback were a need for an improved user interface and strategies to reduce data entry time burdens. A common suggestion was to integrate more dropdown and checkbox response options within the interface to increase efficiency of data entry.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study established a Delphi-consensus on the essential design elements for an ODISS. Expert evaluation resulted in a usable and feasible online system that can be used to improve future dance injury surveillance research across dance populations.Level of EvidenceThe usability and feasibility portion of the study falls under Level 3 evidence according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) hierarchy. Whereas the Delphi portion of the study is at Level 5 Evidence on the CEBM hierarchy.</p>","PeriodicalId":46421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dance Medicine & Science","volume":" ","pages":"1089313X251323157"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dance Medicine & Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1089313X251323157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To develop an optimal outline for an online dance injury surveillance system (ODISS) based on expert consensus from a Delphi survey and evaluate the system's usability and feasibility within a fictional folk-dance academy setting.

Background: Dance is characterized by intensive training and performance, which can elevate susceptibility to injuries. Robust surveillance systems are required to understand and mitigate this injury risk. Current systems exhibit limitations and lack uniformity.

Methods: A Delphi panel of 35 stage 1 experts were recruited through snowball sampling from online professional networks, professional dance associations, organizations, and academies. Inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, fluent in English, and worked as dance academics or researchers, clinicians, instructors, managers, or competitive or professional dancers. These stage 1 experts were provided with a preliminary outline of a dance injury surveillance system that covered 6 domains: dancer demographics and screening, exposure monitoring, injury identification and classification, injury management, dancer recovery and system access. Stage 1 experts then voted on the importance of and provided feedback on different design elements within each domain across 2 Delphi survey rounds to determine a consensus system design outline. A pilot system was then developed and evaluated by stage 2 experts, who were end-users and included dance instructors and administrators from various dance academies/institutions recruited through direct invitations. These stage 2 experts utilized the System Usability Scale (SUS) and System Feasibility Measure (SFM) based on application to a fictional folk-dance injury scenario.

Results: In survey round 1, the stage 1 experts reached consensus to include 30 elements and exclude 3 elements and demonstrated mixed opinion on 30 elements that were revised into 14 elements for further consideration in round 2. All but 1 element reached consensus to include after round 2. System testing demonstrated low marginal usability (SUS score: 58.2% ± 11.6%). Stage 2 experts agreed or strongly agreed the system was feasible for 86.7% ± 10.3% of SFM statement ratings. Key areas for improvement identified from stage 2 expert feedback were a need for an improved user interface and strategies to reduce data entry time burdens. A common suggestion was to integrate more dropdown and checkbox response options within the interface to increase efficiency of data entry.

Conclusion: This study established a Delphi-consensus on the essential design elements for an ODISS. Expert evaluation resulted in a usable and feasible online system that can be used to improve future dance injury surveillance research across dance populations.Level of EvidenceThe usability and feasibility portion of the study falls under Level 3 evidence according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) hierarchy. Whereas the Delphi portion of the study is at Level 5 Evidence on the CEBM hierarchy.

开发在线舞蹈伤害监测系统 (ODISS):德尔菲共识、可用性和可行性研究。
目的:根据德尔菲调查得出的专家共识,为在线舞蹈损伤监测系统(ODISS)制定一个最佳大纲,并在一个虚构的民间舞蹈学院环境中评估该系统的可用性和可行性。背景:舞蹈的特点是高强度的训练和表演,会增加受伤的易感性。需要健全的监测系统来了解和减轻这种伤害风险。目前的系统表现出局限性和缺乏一致性。方法:采用滚雪球抽样的方法,从在线专业网络、专业舞蹈协会、组织和院校中招募35名第一阶段专家组成德尔菲小组。纳入标准为年龄≥18岁,英语流利,担任舞蹈学者或研究人员、临床医生、教练、管理人员或竞技或专业舞者。向这些第一阶段专家提供了舞蹈损伤监测系统的初步大纲,该系统涵盖6个领域:舞者人口统计和筛选、暴露监测、损伤识别和分类、损伤管理、舞者康复和系统访问。第一阶段,专家们通过两轮德尔福调查,对每个领域的不同设计元素的重要性进行投票,并提供反馈,以确定共识的系统设计大纲。第二阶段的专家是最终用户,包括通过直接邀请从各舞蹈学院/机构征聘的舞蹈教员和行政人员。这些第二阶段的专家利用系统可用性量表(SUS)和系统可行性测量(SFM)基于应用到一个虚构的民间舞蹈伤害场景。结果:在第一轮调查中,第一阶段专家达成共识,包括30个要素,排除3个要素,并对30个要素提出了不同意见,修改为14个要素,供第二轮进一步考虑。在第2轮之后,除了1个元素之外,所有元素都达成了共识。系统测试显示低边际可用性(SUS评分:58.2%±11.6%)。阶段2专家同意或强烈同意该系统对86.7%±10.3%的SFM陈述评分是可行的。从第二阶段专家反馈中确定的关键改进领域是需要改进用户界面和减少数据输入时间负担的策略。一个常见的建议是在界面中集成更多的下拉框和复选框响应选项,以提高数据输入的效率。结论:本研究在ODISS的基本设计要素上建立了德尔菲共识。专家评估产生了一个可用且可行的在线系统,可用于改进未来跨舞蹈人群的舞蹈损伤监测研究。证据等级根据循证医学中心(CEBM)的等级,该研究的可用性和可行性部分属于3级证据。然而,该研究的德尔菲部分在CEBM层次上处于第5级证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
33
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信