Template talk:Body roundness index/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Will imperials walk away from default values in cm?

Copied point 7 from #Sandbox_version_as_at_14/12/24 above:

7. Late extra: under "Dimensions", to left of the input boxes, add (cm or in). Yes, I know it could be specified in perfect cowrie shells but in the real world, people need a clue. Otherwise if people in the US [and older people in the UK] see the sizes preloaded with cm in the default set-up, they will assume that they have to use metric and just walk away. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC) updated to add #7 --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

units: No, the calculator is unit less. Any unit will do. Yes, it does show cm and inches as those 2 units suit the vast majority, but don't let that fool you. Any unit will do, as long as height unit = waist unit.

• You can use millimeters, meters, miles, picture-pixels (as user Cmglee did when designing the silhouettes), lightyears, any thing...
• You can use your own heist as a unit, take a piece of string that equals your height and see how many times it can go around your waist.
• You can use pavement tiles as a unit. Lie down and count your height in tiles. Take a piece of string and measure its size in tiles too.
• Or anything else. Really, any unit will do as long as the height unit equals the waist unit.

Uwappa (talk) 16:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Evidently I failed to explain my point 7 adequately. Yes, you and I (and Cmglee) all understand that you can use any consistent units you like. But the public-at-large can't be expected to know that and certainly won't. They are familiar with just two systems, imperial or metric – and for body dimensions, just cm or inches. So we have to tell them that they can use cm or inches. I guess in Oz you don't come across anybody any more who still thinks in Imperial (aka US Customary Units) but I can assure you from experience that they absolutely will walk away from any service that fails to recognise that fact, just as surely as you would if the legend were written in Hangul. This is usability 101. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, scanned your point 7 too quickly (oops, people don't read on the web, they scan. And that includes me!), will get back on it. I think we better move that point to a new chapter. Uwappa (talk) 07:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry it took me so long to understand your question. I remember scanning it and thinking: O, that is an outdated question as the calculator is now unit-less. I probably did not even read your whole text.

Short answer: I do not know what will happen, can't predict the future.

You are in a better position than me to find out, run usability tests in your imperial bubble called England.

Long answer, still a "don't know":

• Yes worry, people might walk away. O dear, this looks like centimeters from outside my imperial bubble!
• No worries, the calculator will move out of the sandbox and find itself embedded in article text explaining the unit less concept, showing sample values in both cm and inches. See Waist-to-height_ratio#Calculation and Body_roundness_index#Calculation.
• No worries, the people that do scroll down to the calculator section are the motivated ones, 'hunting' for a calculation. See https://www.nngroup.com/articles/scrolling-and-attention/ I expect this to be a lot of second time readers helping members of the same target group, e.g. overweight siblings, friends, members of a weight watchers club, customers of a dietitian, weight loss consultant, health coach, personal trainer, etc.
• No worries, as soon as they cross the threshold of clicking on any input field (as motivated ones will do), it will become clear that the calculator does take care of people in the imperial bubble.
• No worries, as you did not come across this problem during your previous usability test. People struggled with computing yards to inches, but were not scared away by default values in cm.
• No worries, as the 'imperials' are a relatively small group, officially just the Americans and Nigerians. I am not sure about the situation in the UK. Yes, officially converted to the metric system, but well... trust the English to stick to old traditions. You'll know better than me. The rest of the world is metric, including countries in the old English empire such as India (outnumbering on its own England with number of native English speakers), Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, South-Africa, Malaysia, Singapore, ...
• No worries, as to my big surprise, non-English (metric) speakers use the English Wikipedia without even knowing it, as it auto-translated to their local language. The English calculator looks like it is from local language Wikipedia. I expect this group to be growing fast.

So, please go and test in the English bubble.

Don't tell the subjects what you are testing, do not influence them. Just ask a high level question, then shut up and just watch, listen and take notes of the times and their voiced thoughts.

The setup I've used, which works excellent:

You (the testing person) play doctor. I (the Wikipedian) play the overweight patient. The real patient is the application. Your thoughts are valuable to me so please voice your thoughts.

Doctor, how much waist size should I loose to be healthy?

I've filmed the hands of the person and the screen, recorded the voice, so I can replay the video afterwards and have all thoughts, all actions, with second accuracy. Most test persons find this setup OK, as their face is not on video and the video won't go online, privacy guaranteed.

Put a pillow under your belt if you're not overweight. Have fun!

user:Zefr, yes, yes, yes, I know you've lost most your enthusiasm for the calculator, but still, you come across as a people oriented person in the imperial bubble called USA. That qualifies you as an excellent usability tester. Could you run a usability test for the latest sandbox version, with students, friends, family, neighbours? That would be just great! Uwappa (talk) 12:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

i had a look at it again. The top row clearly shows Imp and metric as options, so that resolves my concern.

Only one hiatus in the test: user attempted to change just the inches figure (as the feet figure didn't need changing) and was briefly discomfited by the feet box going blank. But quickly put the 5 back in again without comment. So I suggest that we declare it a success.

Final observation: the WHtR was shown with three decimal places: it should never be more than two. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Great, thanks!

It is not a show stopper if a test person stumbles, but does reach the finish line.

• Did "the doctor" reach the finish line?
• Was "the doctor" able to tell you how much waist size you should loose?
• Did you take note of the start and end times?

Done: reduced the default size of the WHtR input box. It now shows 2 decimals and a fraction of the 3rd, hinting: there is more, but you'll have to come and get it. Upon focus the input field wides to show all digits.

I do agree that this has little practical use in daily life, just like inches with 3 digits. Still, some users may want accuracy, for whatever reason. The number of relevant digits is up to them, not up to me.

A rounded WHtR with 2 decimals shows for the most probable usage, compute a personal WHtR, but only if more than 2 decimals available.

Yesterday I did another usability test, with a medic as test person (metric, mobile, English auto translated to her own language). Not a fair go, as she knew the calculator from a previous test. Still, encouraging: she answered the question fast, very fast. It shows that the calculator will be an excellent, very fast tool for medics.

I've now run out of medics as test persons. What I will do:

1. Clean up the talk page, remove solved issues, document test results. Fix some final details and go live with the current sandbox. Sure there will some additional smaller issues that will pop up, but those won't be show stoppers, can be solved without a rollback.
   I do expect some panic, a pandemonium. This is AI! This is medical advice! This violates WP guidelines! This is a thread to the text oriented Wikipedians! So be it...
2. Document usability test results and move on to the next category: IT staff, who have more computer knowledge than the average person. Next are 'normal' people, not medics, not IT staff. Those usability tests will be with the then live calculator at the WHtR page, out of the sandbox, in a WHtR context.
3. The finishing touch will be a bunch of homeless people in a Brisbane day care center. One of my mates works there as a volunteer. He will be an excellent test person himself, as he is visually impaired. I expect some more handicapped people among the homeless, some with Korsakoff_syndrome. That will be the ultimate test for the calculator.
4. Move on and create a new sandbox version with 3 tabs: calculator, AI $\lor \lnot$AI?, structure. I actually wanted the AI and structure to be in this version, but want to go live now and just face the expected pandemonium without those tabs. I really would welcome your input for improving the AI and structure parts.
5. and finally, finally after this long and winding road move on to #Moving_dot_on_graphic_for_version_5.0?

Thanks agaoin for all your support so far! Uwappa (talk) 11:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

You can minimise the kneejerk reaction if you say it is an expert system, no AI involved. Though it isn't even a ES! The question of medical advice doesn't arise since the calculator just does a simple division (for WHtR) and applies a smoke-and-mirrors factor tor BRI

It is just wrong to give greater precision in the output than you had as the input. So unless the waist and height were measured to the nearest mm, it is incompetent to give a result to more than two significant figures. Please read false precision, I really don't understand why this is not getting through to you. The output cannot be more precise than the input. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, output can have more digits than input, e.g. 1/3 or 1/7, or... 180/81. Uwappa (talk) 21:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The expert system, AI, calculator, Chinese room discussion will be dealt with in the future tab "AI?". Let us not have that discussion now, but in the next version as for sure that will take some time and may cause some turbulence. That discussion should not stop the current sandbox version from going live.

I see no showstoppers anymore, will put the sandbox version live 25 dec, ha ha ha, right before the whole Western world enjoys a x-mas dinner... Uwappa (talk) 21:40, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the question "but what is this?" needs to be addressed.

• Is it an expert system?
• AI?
• Chinese room?
• Spreadsheet?
• Calculator?

That question will be the second tab in the nest sandbox version. Please sit back and relax till it arrives in the sandbox and we can take it from there.

Same story for the 3rd tab to be, the WP guideline and policy stuff... Uwappa (talk) 09:24, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Proposed version 4 is a step too far, reverted for further discussion

I have reverted upload of the proposed version 4 per WP:BRD. The current version 3 is clean, uncluttered and looks professional and encyclopedic. The proposed version 4 is messy, cluttered and looks amateurish and unencyclopedic. Do we really need to invite comment from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine?

Sorry, Uwappa, you did a great job creating v3 and you should have moved on to other things at that point. I'm afraid this is a classic case of overworking. I suggest strongly that you quit while you are ahead and don't pursue it any further. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:55, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, well, well.

What is the blocking point? Uwappa (talk) 14:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Version 4 is an unpleasing, oversized image way over the top for what is needed for a clear calculator presentation. Please revert to this version. Zefr (talk) 17:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Why didn't you raise this as a no-go before it left the sandbox? Uwappa (talk) 08:34, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

JMF, please stop worrying about my time management. There is no reason to worry, I really only work on WP when I do have some time to spare. It is hard to predict though how much spare time I'll have. Most of the time there is plenty, but sorry past few weeks there was hardly any.

I do loooove this little Calculator project. It seems so damn easy, just 2 input fields, height and waist and goooo! What can be so difficult about that???

Well... I feel like Bruce Tognazzini in [maximizing windows], it is one design problem after the other.

1. Mobile phone users just love their phone, take it everywhere they go and have it thus available all of the time. To my astonishment some testers take their phone to their office and test the calculator while sitting in front of their daytime desktop, with excellent screen, mouse and keyboard. And do not even bother to switch on the desktop because they are so used to their phone as the preferred device for WP.
2. Mobile users are convinced their phone offers a superior GUI, blissfully unaware of the advantages of a big screen. To add insult to injury, a mobile phone will show an on screen numeric keyboard, consuming half of the tiny screen. Their relative thick fingers will block sight of the screen. Mouse over effects? No have. Tooltips? No have. Quick preview of next WP page on mouseover? No have. Several windows in parallel, no have, on mobiles it is back to DOS era. And... really blissfully unaware what a desktop WP experience would be like, they are are convinced their beloved mobile offers a superior experience. And these mobile users were the majority of testers.
3. JMF tested in the imperial bubble called England. English users struggled with the 12 inch in a feet concept, input inches only. So, in came the height dropdown simulation with cm, feet & inches.
4. I started with a retired paramedic who worked on an ambulance for years. She is smarter than me, with a very quick brain. She nailed the problem in minutes flat and figured it out pretty quick that a WHtR of 4.5 would be right in the center of the green, healthy zone. And... failed because the damn mobile did not offer her a decimal comma for 4,5 (standard in many countries in South-America and Europe) and... gave up. That was a hard fail. So back to the drawing board and invent an input method that is fine for both decimal dots as well as comma's, make the numeric settings of the mobile irrelevant.
5. Local language was an unexpected problem. Some testers consult the English Wikipedia but do not see any English as their mobile phone automatically translates everything to the local language. That is horror for a screen with an abbreviation like WHtR and no page preview popup as mobile phones do not support mouse over effects, lack a mouse pointer.
6. The first few tests failed, but that's history now. With the current design all testers reach the finish. It is now just a matter of optimizing the speed, minimize the time.
7. I've paid extra attention to the waist dropdown. And yes indeed, that is the largest time consumer at the moment. It is not a showstopper though, just a slow down.

So I suggest:

1. go live with the last stable version. Yes I know it is not perfect, but it is a working version. Under the hood, everything is WHtR based now, no more problems with 0.4995 being rounded to 0.5 and showing wrong health warning colours.
2. continue to improve and focus on the waist dropdown. I've puzzled about it for the last few weeks and have a solution in mind:
   1. Most users start with erasing the default height and start typing in an empty input field.
   2. For an empty height input field, the calculator will show a long list of realistic values, from the smallest baby to the longest living human, with imperial feet and inches shown as well.
   3. Imperial users may start typing '5' for 5 feet 10. After typing 5 the dropdown will show only those values that start with a 5, either metric (none) or imperial (5'0", 5'1", 5'2", ... 5'10", 5'11", 5'12"). The dropdown will show cm and feet&inches(3 decimals) for each value.
   4. An imperial user may type a 1.Now, with 51 in the inputfield the dropdown will show only values that start with digits 5 and 1, e.g. 5"1', 5"10', 5"11', 5"12'. (again cm and the equivalent feet&inch values)
   5. The imperial user will click the desired value in the dropdown, e.g. 179cm≈5′10″ and next the green tickmark. The cursor will move to the waist field where something similar happens.
   6. A metric user will probably also erase the height input field and start typing '1' for with 179 in mind. The dropdown will show all values that start with 1, either metric (100, 101, 102, ..., 198, 199) or imperial (none).
   7. Similar story, the metric user types a 7, and with the input field now containing 17 the dropdown will show only 170, 171, ... 179, each value with the feet&inches equivalent.
   8. The metric user selects 179cm≈5′10″ and click the green tickmark to move to the waist input field.

I expect this to work very well for both metric as well as imperial users. And technically this is possible with the current calculator technology. It will require a lot of Template:Calculator-hideifzero statements. So be it.

I'll try to make it look like a 'normal' Combo_box which the calculator does not have in stock yet. I'll post a request at the calculator talk page. So far technical support have been extremely good. The calculator is rapidly loosing its teething problems.

How the two of you can help:

1. Restore the latest live version of calculator. Yes, I know it is not perfect yet, but it is a version with which all test users reach the finish line for the question: "Doctor (the tester), how much waist should I (the wikipedian) loose to be healthy?"
2. Think ahead. For sure there will be a pandemonium when a calculator with silhouettes and colours goes live. This is AI! Panick! We the large group of text-focussed Wikipedians can't maintain this! Panick, panick, panick! Have a look at #AI_or_not_AI?. Would that calm people down?
3. Prepare for another pandemonium: This violates all WP guidelines! Panick, panick, panick! Have a look at #Information_hierarchy, which will be on a tab in a next version. Will that calm text oriented Wikipedians?
4. Be patient. Software development is a painstaking slow process. It is very different from text-editing Wikipedia, where you can copy and edit texts from reliable secondary sources. I'm going as fast as I can. And do not worry: I do know how to manage my own time. Wikipedia is a fun activity for me, only possible when spare time available.
5. When the new dropdowns are ready: go and run usability tests with the sandbox version, with users that are 'fresh', have never seen the calculator before]]. In my own real life bubble I have trouble finding imperial users, youngsters, obese people willing to do a test. Share your results while it is still in the sandbox, before it goes live.
6. I myself will continu to run usability tests too, going down from medical experts (done), IT specialists (in progress), 'normal' people and as grand finale: customers of a day care center in Brisbane where one of my mates works as a volunteer.

Uwappa (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

See also User_talk:Uwappa#Edit_warring for escalation in progress. Uwappa (talk)!

Time to stop

Uwappa, you really need to listen to what Zefr and I are telling you. With Version 4, you have taken this development too far. In the articles that invoke it, its size and impact are wildly out of proportion to its importance. Version 3 was just right, see "Less is more". If you really want to run with V4, then you need to find a new host for it because it is not suitable for Wikipedia. There are many more other topics here that could use your skills. You have spent more than long enough on this one. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you repost your escalation. Uwappa (talk) 12:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Usability test of body roundness calculators

How to do a usability test?

Video on YouTube

Jakob Nielsen: Usability Testing w. 5 Users: Design Process (video 1 of 3)

Video on YouTube

video 2 of 3

Video on YouTube

video 3 of 3

Maximizing Windows

Bruce Tognazzini: A design team must be prepared to go to any lengths--or depths--to achieve a successful product. Usually, that means a redesign or two. In constructing Healtheon's Benefit Central, for one apparently simple screen, it meant seven major design iterations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwappa (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Perform a usability test yourself

The case:

• You are a doctor who just moved from good old England to sunny Brisbane Australia.
• So that is all good, but you need some practice with this crazy metric system.

1. Go and get a 'patient'. Any patient with a height and waist will do, friends, family, your partner, you yourself, a doll, . Any object with height and waist is good enough, even which are totally ridiculous patients.
2. Take note of the start time, to the seconds, e.g. 15:00:25
3. Take note of any difficulty you encounter.
4. Calculate the current BRI based on the current height and waist. Use Template:Body_roundness_index/sandbox#calculator-field-height
5. How much cm should this patient loose to reach a healthy central adiposity?
6. Take note of the end time, also to the seconds.
7. Fill in the table below with your results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwappa (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Usability test results

In progress by Uwappa.

Date	height	current waist	healthy waist	Remarks
todo: look up	unknown	unknown	unknown	Imperial_units, todo: look up mobile/laptop/desktop, usabilit ytest performed by user:JMF, Todo Uwappa: look up reported problems with imperial versus metric, 12 inches in feet, American Thousandth_of_an_inch versus British sub inch unit (todo look up English sub inch unit discussed on talk page), solution
2 nov 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	9:05	laptop, test done by user:Uwappa, not a medic, specialist in function-psychology, man-machine interface problems, where the user interface design is the "patient". Not a fair go, as I worked on development of the calculator. Found a bug when height goes up. That is most likely the bug in Template:Calculator which is already fixed but not live yet. Did a complex version of the test, with 3 objects and did not like it. Simplified the case down to 1 object, similar to a doctor who treats just one patient at the time.
todo: look up	todo: look up	todo: look up	todo: look up	Todo Uwappa: look up results of 2nd usability test by JMF
4 nov 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo describe time of failure	mobile phone, metric, Retired ambulance paramedic, todo: decimal dot-comma problem, (Test aborted, when paramedic could not input a WHtR value of 4,5 (with a decimal comma) to let calculator compute healthy waist size), implemented solution
17 nov 2024	todo: look up	todo: look up	todo describe time of failure	look up: desktop or laptop?, Volunteer for Floating Doctors Panama, todo problem, solution
22 nov 2024	todo: look up	todo: look up	todo describe time of failure	laptop, Physician assistant, specialist in natural medicines, todo problem, solution
26 nov 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	mobile, Anesthesiologist at Intensive_care_unit specialist in obese patients, todo: describe WHtR unknown in local medial world, BMI versus WHtR, unit less height and waist, problem, solution
9 dec 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	mobile, Specialist in Postnatal care, auto translate of english wikipedia to local language, unaware of English original
?? dec 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	mobile, not a medic by profession, first aid provider
27 dec 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	laptop with large second monitor (not used during test), Information Technology specialist at a Tier 4 datacenter Slow down factors: 'stupid obese patient' who did not know own height and waist size, nor how to measure those input variables, 'did not know anything about the calculator,' was no help whatsoever. difficult initial learning proces, no medical knowledge, unfamiliar with WHtR, how to measure height and waist. The 'doctor' managed to 'climb' all the steps of the learning process without any support. The learning curve did overload the doctor's short term memory, so the patient's had to ask the doctor a second time: how much of my waist size should I loose to be healthy? non-standard waist drop-down list with buttons in combination with 'extreme obese patient'. It took 'the doctor' some time to discover the difference between big step buttons and fine-tuning buttons.
27 dec 2024	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	todo: look up time	same 'doctor', same hardware, second patient (not obese), no learning curve anymore

Time to complete task HH:MM:SS	Result	problems found	sign (optional)
to do Uwappa: move to table above	Failure	4 minutes to get to Sandbox Calculator ;00 00 start of video 00 33 subject gets URL on paper of BRI calculator 01 52 Google search results on screen of smartphone 01 52 BRI calculator live version on screen, smartphone 02 21 smartphone screen goes black, power save 02 21 smartphone screen goes black, power save 02 28 requested to put camera in portrait, no success, as subject was busy to relogin to smartphone 02 28 requested to put camera in portrait, no success 02 58 click through from Google to live version of body roundness calculator 03 28 smartphone in powersave mode again 03 51 click to sandbox version, no response from smartphone 03 59 retry, Sandbox version in view, start of usability test 1 minutes to ask question What should the waist size be for the chosen patient? 00 00 .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. ...

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwappa (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Commercial calculators

Can you find one that outperforms the WP calculator?

• https://www.mdapp.co/waist-to-height-ratio-whtr-calculator-433/
• https://bri-calculator.com/
• https://mdcalc.com/calc/10575/body-roundness-index-bri
• https://bri.jonh.eu/
• https://calculatebri.com/
• https://webfce.com/bri-calculator/

Please extend the list if you find one that scores better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwappa (talk • contribs) 12:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)