Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30930610›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting2017

User-Centered Evaluations with Older Adults: Testing the Usability of a Mobile Health System for Heart Failure Self-Management.

Victor P Cornet, Carly N Daley, Preethi Srinivas, Richard J Holden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Human factors and ergonomics methods for pharmacy research and clinical practice.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Key methodological considerations for usability testing of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Victor P CornetIndiana University School of Informatics and Computing - Indianapolis.
Carly N DaleyIndiana University School of Informatics and Computing - Indianapolis.
Preethi SrinivasIndiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc.
Richard J HoldenIndiana University School of Informatics and Computing - Indianapolis.

Funding

A Human Factors Approach to Support Older Chronically Ill Patients' Home CareK01AG044439 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI HOLDEN, RICHARD J · 2014 to 2016
$359k
NIA NIH HHS K01 AG044439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many older adults living with heart failure struggle to follow recommended self-management routines. To help older adults with heart failure more effectively and efficiently self-manage their disease, we developed Engage, a mobile health application promoting the performance, logging, and sharing of routine self-management behaviors. This paper reports on the usability evaluation of the Engage system with 15 older adults with heart failure and informal caregivers. In two phases, participants used Engage during a task-based usability test (n=5) and a scenario-based usability test (n=10). Usability and performance data were assessed through video-recorded observation and the administration of the system usability scale (SUS) and NASA Task Load Index (TLX). We found that task-based testing was useful in quickly identifying problems within our application, but scenario-based testing elicited more valuable feedback from older adults. A comparison of the different evaluation methods used and the discussion of the challenges encountered provide multiple implications for the practice of usability testing of mobile health products with older adults.

Identifiers

PMID30930610
PMCPMC6436842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.