Home-care alerts Personal proposal by Per-Arne Andersen H1 · Spring 2027 https://thesis.uya.no/proposals/signals-that-matter/ Explain why a home-care alert was raised and what information is missing. TECHNICAL - Create an alert replay tool with timestamps, missing-data warnings and acknowledgement buttons. - Compare a plain alert list with the same alerts plus explanations. DATA (planned) 30 fictional home-care alert cases Create 30 CSV cases: 15 routine and 15 urgent, with 5 incomplete cases in each group. Store patient ID, observation and time separately from the hidden response key. Allow requests for missing information as reviewed responses. METHOD 8 home-care staff review 12 disjoint cases each using identical alert order, values and controls; only explanations differ. Balance order and case difficulty. Report per-person missed follow-ups, unnecessary escalation and decision time. Collect confidence after each response and analyse it separately from response correctness. OUTPUT Alert prototype, labelled cases and comparison report. BACHELOR Task: Build a rule-based alert list with missing-data warnings and acknowledgement. Data: 30 fictional home-care alert cases (planned) Create 30 CSV cases: 15 routine and 15 urgent, with 5 incomplete cases in each group. Store patient ID, observation and time separately from the hidden response key. Allow requests for missing information as reviewed responses. Requires: Recruit home-care staff; obtain clinical review of cases. Method: Use the reviewed fictional CSV cases; check every rule and observe 4 staff completing follow-up tasks. Use established usability criteria. Output: Working alert interface, rule tests and a prioritised usability-fix list. Use relevant literature to justify the established approach; a new research contribution is not the aim of this proposal. MASTER Investigate whether explanation benefits depend on missing information. Cross explanation on/off with complete/incomplete cases in the same alert interface; distinguish successful follow-up from increased willingness to trust an alert. Intended contribution: Evidence about when explanations help, plus design rules for incomplete alerts. STARTING PAPERS Buçinca et al. (2021) — To Trust or to Think: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.09692 Derive a competing explanation based on verification effort and overreliance. Vasconcelos et al. (2023) — Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.06823 Compare verification cost with trust as explanations of observed decisions. Search Scopus or Web of Science and ACM Digital Library using the topic query, then follow citations to the thesis start date. Record searches and compare methods, data, findings and limitations in literature-matrix.csv. Use that review to confirm or revise the gap and choose a current comparator. The linked papers are starting points. START HERE Tools: Python, pandas, Streamlit 1. Draft routine/urgent cases with complete/incomplete information; have a clinical reviewer check acceptable follow-ups. 2. Render the same cases in a plain list and an explained list; keep alert order identical. 3. Pilot 4 tasks with one reviewer; finalise two non-overlapping case sets before recruitment. Literature search: home care alert explanations decision making Study controls: - Before collecting participant data, agree consent, storage and withdrawal handling with the supervisor. Use participant codes, not names, in study files. - Separate silent timed tasks from retrospective interviews. Timing during think-aloud sessions is descriptive, not an isolated interface-speed effect. - For the master’s study, use the research task above to define the factors and comparisons in this pilot plan. Preregister one primary outcome and feasible scope after the literature review; do not add every possible model or interface variant. REQUIRES Recruit 8 home-care staff; obtain clinical review of cases. -------------------- NON-TECHNICAL - Create paper cases crossing urgency and information completeness. - Ask staff for an action, responsible role and missing information; compare their reasoning across cases. DATA (planned) 12 fictional alert cases + 8 interviews Create 12 paper cases crossing routine/urgent with complete/incomplete information; 3 per combination. Recruit 8 home-care staff for 45-minute sessions. METHOD Use a case-by-participant matrix to compare action, responsible role and requests for information across urgency/completeness. Preserve disagreements; compare uncertainty-based explanations with established local responsibility as an alternative explanation. OUTPUT Coded interviews and a revised alert template. BACHELOR Task: Find what staff need to see in an alert before they can act. Data: 12 fictional alert cases (planned) Create 12 paper cases crossing routine/urgent with complete/incomplete information; 3 per combination. Requires: Recruit staff and obtain clinical review; no patient records. Method: Use the paper cases in 4 staff interviews; group problems by missing information, urgency and responsibility. Output: A revised paper alert template with traceable requirements. Use relevant literature to justify the established approach; a new research contribution is not the aim of this proposal. MASTER Explain how uncertainty and responsibility shape alert decisions. Compare urgency/completeness cases using a theory-led coding matrix; test verification effort against role responsibility as competing explanations. Intended contribution: An explanation of follow-up decision patterns and the conditions under which it holds. STARTING PAPERS Vasconcelos et al. (2023) — Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.06823 Compare verification cost with trust as explanations of observed decisions. Orlikowski & Gash (1994) — Technological Frames: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/196734.196745 Compare how roles interpret the purpose, operation and use of the same system. Search Scopus or Web of Science and ACM Digital Library using the topic query, then follow citations to the thesis start date. Record searches and compare methods, data, findings and limitations in literature-matrix.csv. Use that review to confirm or revise the gap and choose a current comparator. The linked papers are starting points. START HERE Tools: LibreOffice Writer/Calc, audio recorder with consent; no programming required. 1. Prepare a pilot with 2 examples from: 12 fictional alert cases + 8 interviews. Write the task questions and a reference answer sheet. 2. Write a recruitment message, information sheet and consent form for the participants named above. Agree privacy handling with the supervisor before contact. 3. Pilot one session after approval; revise unclear questions, freeze the task sets and coding categories, then recruit the planned sample. Literature search: home care alert explanations decision making qualitative scenario study Study controls: - Before collecting participant data, agree consent, storage and withdrawal handling with the supervisor. Use participant codes, not names, in study files. - Pilot separately, then freeze the questions and coding plan. Check objective answer keys independently; keep an audit trail of coding, including disagreements. - For comparisons, counterbalance order and case assignment; do not show a person both versions of one case. Report participant-level findings, not repeated tasks as independent people. REQUIRES Recruit staff and obtain clinical review; no patient records. Bachelor: apply established methods and evaluate a practical solution or study. Master: position a research question in current scientific literature, investigate a mechanism or unresolved problem, and explain the contribution. Final scope is agreed with me. Study sizes are proposed; participant recruitment and planned materials are not already arranged.