Taxonomy and its efficiency

Healthcare company partnered with Fathom to improve the usability of their website.

Overview

The current content of a Healthcare Company is not very user-friendly and structured metadata will improve the findability of information through both browse and search methods.​ This research was designed to gather feedback on some of the new experiences that the taxonomy project will make possible. ​


*Some details about the project are missing due to an NDA *

MY ROLE

UX Researcher | Usability Testing Note-Taking | Logistical Support

METHODS

Usability Testing | Qualitative Data Analysis

TOOLS

Axure | Zoom | Microsoft Excel | PowerPoint

Summary

Key Points

Problem: Research how taxonomy can be used to improve the search for specialists in the medical healthcare companies site.

Process: Qualitative research was conducted remotely with people who have sought care in the last six months. Participants were asked to interact with the prototype and complete representative tasks.​

Findings: Through the two rounds of qualitative research done, participants reacted very positively to changes that could be made with the implementation of the taxonomy but continue to need context about how the results are relevant to their search. ​Confusion about how a particular specialty related to a search term was alleviated through designs that provided more context.

Research process

Problem Statement

Qualitative research was conducted via remote interviews with people who have sought care in the last six months. Participants were asked to interact with the prototype and complete representative tasks.​ Through this research, the team learned how to best support users in identifying the type of specialist or appointment they most likely need based on their search behavior​. The team also learned how the new taxonomy-empowered ways to explore and evaluate mental health care options.

The users consisted of people who ..

  • Looked for or received care within last 6 months​

  • Had health insurance through employer or Medicare​

  • Did not work in healthcare​

  • Had seen at least one specialist for a health condition​

  • Had previously scheduled with a mental health provider

  • A parent or caregiver​

    Demographics

  • Consisted of people who identified as male, female and non-binary

  • Participants included White, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, Black, Biracial  ​

USers

Research Process

  1. Introduction​: The moderator was able to explain the reason why we were doing the research and answer any questions the users had

  2. Participant background​: Allowed us to find out the amount of experience the users had with booking their own appointments, medical terms

  3. Prototype scenarios​: Each scenario helped us learn different things about the current healthcare website

    1. Seasonal allergies​:

    2. Food allergy

      Scenarios 1 and 2 allowed us to learn more about the new feature implemented in the prototype that allowed users to find care through a symptom

    3. Shoulder pain​

    4. Tonsillectomy​

      Scenarios 3 and 4 allowed us to learn more about how users would schedule a procedure

    5. Mental health symptoms

    6. Chemical health assessment​

    7. Cognitive Behavior Therapy

      Scenarios 5-7 allowed us to learn about how users would schedule a mental health appointment

  4. Search Results review​

  5. Thank and close

Round 1

Outcomes from round 1

Summary of Results

Takeaways for Round 2

Scenario 1 and 2 displayed the current Find Care functionality

  • “To help with” was the addition to the prototype which users responded positively to because they were able to search for healthcare providers that could help with the symptom they looked up

  • Users also responded positively to the list of options provided to the taxonomy because it provided options that they had not thought of

  • Users were confused by the “last name: search engine and some inserted their last name instead a healthcare providers

Scenarios 3 and 4 displayed the appointment search function

  • Participants reacted positively to seeing care-descriptor terms on the sub-pages, but they hesitated to schedule because they were unsure whether they were scheduling a consult or a procedure.

  • Some participants were confused when the search they looked up were not highlighted like the mental model they have

Scenarios 5-7 displayed “my care“ section with changes in relevant care options from taxonomy, the mental and behavioral page showed a section that was called “ Or find providers who specialize in“

  • Participants quickly identified the Mental and behavioral health section as their place to start and appreciated the comprehensive list of options​

  • Most users were confused by scenario 7 sending them to a list of clinics. Many assumed that they were clinics that provided CBT, but without anything on the page saying so explicitly, many said they would not continue

In the final section of our testing, participants were asked to compare two sets of search results for the same search. In each case, Option A was the search results that are displayed on the site today and Option B was simulated results based on the new taxonomy and which included some visual treatment of topic keywords’

Is a psychiatrist visit covered?​

  • Participants preferred the existing results because they liked seeing the doctors with their pictures at the top

    When can you enroll in Medicare​

  • Participants universally chose Option B as having the best results for the question about when you can enroll in Medicare​

    How do you dispute a claim?​

  • Participants once again preferred Option B – because it gave results that were more relevant, but few noticed the yellow box that told them we were showing results for “appeals”

1.   Participants were very pleased with the keyword options presented to them from the taxonomy when they searched in the  “to help with” field of Find Care​

2.   Tying taxonomy keywords to the care option boxes helped participants consistently find what they were looking for in the appointment search but participants wanted to understand why they were seeing the results they were seeing​

3.   Participants reacted positively to seeing care-descriptor terms as sub-page titles, but they hesitated to schedule because they were unsure whether they were scheduling a consult or a procedure​

4.   Changes to the Mental and Behavioral Health options resulted in high completion rates from our participants , they felt the options provided were comprehensive​

5.   Our simulated, taxonomy-ordered search results performed better than existing results, but participants relied on titles and descriptions over the topic keywords​

  • Continue to iterate visual treatment of keywords and explore options for how to inform users of their purpose/usefulness. ​

  • Iterate on visual treatment telling users we have “corrected” their search term to see if more people notice the work the search engine can do for them.​

  • Explore additional concepts for Scenario 1 that answer the question directly

Round 2

Outcomes from round 2

  • Participants reacted overall very positively to changes that could be made now once the taxonomy is implemented. They continue to need context about how the results are relevant to their search. ​

  • The surprise users felt at the volume of suggested search terms turned to delight by showing only parent/child and explicitly related terms.​

  • Confusion about how a particular specialty related to a search term was alleviated through designs that provided more context, though users were split on which format for that context they preferred.​

  • Finding a mental health provider was greatly enhanced by providing clear pathways by diagnosis, treatment, and population.​

  • Search results that update to a preferred term were considered helpful, but only if the user was informed of the switch and the results were clearly more relevant.

  1. Continue to iterate the design and language of the interrupt box to ensure a balance between PCP and access to specialists​

  2. Update the wording of the appointment search area to better explain to users how it filters the options of the page.​

  3. Consider unmoderated testing with a larger number of participants that includes 5-10 topic areas to test to better determine context direction for appointment page boxes.​

  4. Implement taking the user to a location/doctor page when a user types a specific treatment, but add context

  5. Continue to iterate the design of the Mental & Behavioral Health page to include the six primary options, while providing better access to the Conditions, Treatments, and Populations categories.​

  6. Consider not showing terms/tags in search results – or consider testing additional design and tutorial options so users get their value.​

  7. Update users’ search with more relevant terms when appropriate (and based on the taxonomy), but be sure to both provide context on why it was changed and provide a method back to their original search.​

Summary of Results

Next Steps

In scenarios 1 and 2 during the second round

  • Participants found the new version of keywords to be very useful

  • They also appreciated the suggestions

    “So for me, obviously, just searching ‘allergy’ is a good first step, Again, I  really like that the drop-down menu has like related things.“

    - Participant 7

In scenarios 3 and 4 during round 2, the design of this page was changed slightly to put more emphasis on the search feature. As a result,​

  • More participants used the search first in this round​

  • Many participants did not see that the search bar filtered the boxes below the first time they used it

From round 1 of testing we learned that participants wanted to know why they were being shown things

  • In round 2 participants were shown one box with a dynamically generated sentence with highlighting and another with terms straight from the taxonomies. Participants consistently preferred concepts that provided more information and context, but were split on which one was best…

In scenerios 5-7

from round 1 we learned that participants didnt mind being taken directly to the clinic results as long as it was explained

  • In round 2, clear wording at the top of the clinic results page eliminated the confusion

  • Participants appreciated the additional detail in the mental and behavioral page

    “The last one too [Populations Treated]… if I am wanting someone for my own kid, I am probably wanting someone who has more experience with adolescents. Or if you have someone dealing with PTSD from past service in war someone who specializes in that.​”

Search results comparison

In each case, Option A was the search results that display on the site today and Option B/C were simulated results based on the new taxonomy and which included some visual treatment of topic keywords​

  • Participants unanimously chose option B (the taxonomy simulated results) for both the Medicare and Psychiatry scenarios – citing more relevant information​

  • All participants (except one) did NOT notice the topics/keywords listed underneath the result – focusing instead solely on the result titles and descriptions.​

Upon seeing the additional yellow context box participant 6 mentioned

“That helps because I assumed it was kind of the same thing. I wasn’t sure with the legal words. Right, so that helps big time!​”