Tools for Achieving Usable Ex Post Transparency: A Survey <s> V. CLASSIFICATION OF USABLE TETs <s> Examination of the systemic properties and forms of interaction that characterize classification and categorization reveals fundamental syntactic differences between the structure of classification systems and the structure of categorization systems. These distinctions lead to meaningful differences in the contexts within which information can be apprehended and influence the semantic information available to the individual. Structural and semantic differences between classification and categorization are differences that make a difference in the information environment by influencing the functional activities of an information system and by contributing to its constitution as an information environment. <s> BIB001 </s> Tools for Achieving Usable Ex Post Transparency: A Survey <s> V. CLASSIFICATION OF USABLE TETs <s> OBJECTIVE ::: To provide practical strategies for conducting and evaluating analyses of qualitative data applicable for health services researchers. DATA SOURCES AND DESIGN: We draw on extant qualitative methodological literature to describe practical approaches to qualitative data analysis. Approaches to data analysis vary by discipline and analytic tradition; however, we focus on qualitative data analysis that has as a goal the generation of taxonomy, themes, and theory germane to health services research. ::: ::: ::: PRINCIPLE FINDINGS ::: We describe an approach to qualitative data analysis that applies the principles of inductive reasoning while also employing predetermined code types to guide data analysis and interpretation. These code types (conceptual, relationship, perspective, participant characteristics, and setting codes) define a structure that is appropriate for generation of taxonomy, themes, and theory. Conceptual codes and subcodes facilitate the development of taxonomies. Relationship and perspective codes facilitate the development of themes and theory. Intersectional analyses with data coded for participant characteristics and setting codes can facilitate comparative analyses. ::: ::: ::: CONCLUSIONS ::: Qualitative inquiry can improve the description and explanation of complex, real-world phenomena pertinent to health services research. Greater understanding of the processes of qualitative data analysis can be helpful for health services researchers as they use these methods themselves or collaborate with qualitative researchers from a wide range of disciplines. <s> BIB002 </s> Tools for Achieving Usable Ex Post Transparency: A Survey <s> V. CLASSIFICATION OF USABLE TETs <s> The paper investigates the ethics of information transparency (henceforth transparency). It argues that transparency is not an ethical principle in itself but a pro-ethical condition for enabling or impairing other ethical practices or principles. A new definition of transparency is offered in order to take into account the dynamics of information production and the differences between data and information. It is then argued that the proposed definition provides a better understanding of what sort of information should be disclosed and what sort of information should be used in order to implement and make effective the ethical practices and principles to which an organisation is committed. The concepts of "heterogeneous organisation" and "autonomous computational artefact" are further defined in order to clarify the ethical implications of the technology used in implementing information transparency. It is argued that explicit ethical designs, which describe how ethical principles are embedded into the practice of software design, would represent valuable information that could be disclosed by organisations in order to support their ethical standing. <s> BIB003 </s> Tools for Achieving Usable Ex Post Transparency: A Survey <s> V. CLASSIFICATION OF USABLE TETs <s> Thematic analysis is an approach that is often used for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data in primary qualitative research. 'Thematic synthesis' draws on the principles of thematic analysis and identifies the recurring themes or issues from multiple studies, interprets and explains these themes, and draws conclusions in systematic reviews. This paper conceptualizes the thematic synthesis approach in software engineering as a scientific inquiry involving five steps that parallel those of primary research. The process and outcome associated with each step are described and illustrated with examples from systematic reviews in software engineering. <s> BIB004
The term 'classification' as employed throughout this survey, BIB003 acts as ''a representational tool used to organise a collection of information resources'' BIB001 . According to Bradley et al. BIB002 , a classification or taxonomy is a ''formal system for classifying multifaceted, complex phenomena according to a set of common conceptual domains and dimensions.'' It serves the purpose of ''increas(ing) clarity in defining and comparing complex phenomena'' BIB002 . In the context of this survey, the classification provides a well-defined scheme against which all reviewed publications were systematically classified. The scheme discussed in this section was specifically chosen against the backdrop of patterns and themes detected in the TETs of the reviewed publications. The elicitation of these themes and the superordinate model are the result of an 'integrated approach' of systematically analysing the contents of the reviewed literature as discussed by Cruzes et al. BIB004 . Starting with an initial set of a priori dimensions retrieved from related work reviewing the literature, followed an inductive approach that iteratively revised the taxonomy to accommodate individual aspects found in the papers. Each iteration worked towards inferring increasingly generic themes that reflected the characteristics of all reviewed TETs. The classification scheme satisfies the combined characteristics of a 'faceted analysis' and a 'paradigm' as specified by Kwasnik  . It suffices the principles of a faceted analysis in that it captures knowledge about a set of artifacts, i.e. the TETs, by means of independent, multi-faceted properties without requiring complete knowledge regarding the extent of the examined entities or the exact relationship of their facets. It fulfils the principles of a paradigm in that individual aspects may be unspecified or only partially applicable. However, individual aspects are not specified by the intersection of two or more attributes represented by the dimensions of a matrix, but by the attributes of a single dimension that all considered artifacts are classified against. As a result, the classification scheme serves as a model for a body of knowledge in which queries by either artifact or attribute are equally possible. Table 2 displays the classification scheme in the form of a matrix. The horizontal axis is structured hierarchically. On the topmost level, this hierarchy consists of the high-level themes represented by the subsections of Section V. More concrete concepts are classified on the second level of the hierarchy. In some instances, the two upper levels concur conceptually, for example, for Hosting platform (Section V-C). In those cases, Table 2 indicates only the combined concept that spans both levels. The third level of the hierarchy constitutes concrete facets of the superordinate concepts. Each of these facets, and thus each table column, describes a conceptual property that each reviewed publication was scrutinised against. Unlike strict hierarchies and tree-like classifications, as specified by Kwasnik [53] , the categories of this scheme are contextually interrelated, overlapping, and not necessarily mutually exclusive. Judgmental statements, for example, are classified as Guidance (Section V-E.2), but could also be considered a means of Predication (Section V-D). The facets indicated as table entries in Table 2 specify whether and to what extent a particular property applies. An entry marked as '•' means that the respective facet applies fully, while '•' means that it applies in part. ' * ' denotes that the respective publication did not provide sufficient information to be able to make a justified statement about the nature of the property. However, it is assumed from the overall context that the property applies either fully or in part. Conversely, the absence of any of the aforementioned marks signifies that the reviewers found no evidence that the property in question applies to the respective TET. The rows in Table 2 are sorted in ascending order by the date of publication as specified in the bibliography records of the reviewed papers. Most of the elicited characteristics that are presented below relate to the principles of usable transparency that were derived in Section II, except for those that relate to implementation details or type of evaluation of TETs. The relation of the principles of usable transparency to the facets and concepts of the classification will be discussed in more detail in the following subsections.