Trial reportPloS one2015
Usage Position and Virtual Keyboard Design Affect Upper-Body Kinematics, Discomfort, and Usability during Prolonged Tablet Typing.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Towards Usable E-Health. A Systematic Review of Usability Questionnaires.Applied clinical informatics · 2017Pooled it
- The associations of mobile touch screen device use with musculoskeletal symptoms and exposures: A systematic review.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe increase in tablet usage allows people to perform computer work in non-traditional office environments. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of changes in tablet keyboard design on postures of the upper extremities and neck, discomfort, and usability under different usage positions during prolonged touch-typing.
methodsEighteen healthy participants familiar with touch-screen devices were randomized into three usage positions (desk, lap, and bed) and completed six, 60-minute typing sessions using three virtual keyboard designs (standard, wide, split). Electrogoniometers continuously measured the postures of the wrists, elbow, and neck. Body discomfort and system usability were evaluated by questionnaires before and immediately after each typing session.
resultsSeparate linear mixed effects models on various postural measures and subjective ratings are conducted with usage position as the between-subject factors, keyboard design and typing duration as the with-in subject factors were conducted. Using the tablet in bed led to more extended wrists but a more natural elbow flexion than the desk position. The angled split virtual keyboard significantly reduced the extent of wrist ulnar deviation than the keyboard with either standard or wide design. However, little difference was observed across the usage position and keyboard design. When the postural data were compared between the middle and end of typing sessions, the wrists, elbow, and neck all exhibited a substantially increased range of joint movements (13% to 38%). The discomfort rating also increased significantly over time in every upper body region investigated. Additionally, the split keyboard design received a higher usability rating in the bed position, whereas participants had more satisfactory experience while using the wide keyboard in the traditional desk setting.
conclusionsProlonged use of tablets in non-traditional office environments may result in awkward postures in the upper body that may expose users to greater risks of developing musculoskeletal symptoms. Adequate virtual keyboard designs show the potential to alleviate some postural effects and improve the user experience without changing the tablet form factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.