Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32338616›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

App-based Self-administrable Clinical Tests of Physical Function: Development and Usability Study.

Ronny Bergquist, Beatrix Vereijken, Sabato Mellone, Mattia Corzani, Jorunn L Helbostad, Kristin Taraldsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ronny BergquistDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6689-3038
Beatrix VereijkenDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-2231-8138
Sabato MelloneDepartment of Electrical, Electronic and Information Engineering "Guglielmo Marconi" (DEI), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7688-0188
Mattia CorzaniDepartment of Electrical, Electronic and Information Engineering "Guglielmo Marconi" (DEI), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5010-6116
Jorunn L HelbostadDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-0214-9290
Kristin TaraldsenDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8466-5450
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NOLaboratori Guglielmo Marconi (Italy) · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObjective measures of physical function in older adults are widely used to predict health outcomes such as disability, institutionalization, and mortality. App-based clinical tests allow users to assess their own physical function and have objective tracking of changes over time by use of their smartphones. Such tests can potentially guide interventions remotely and provide more detailed prognostic information about the participant's physical performance for the users, therapists, and other health care personnel. We developed 3 smartphone apps with instrumented versions of the Timed Up and Go (Self-TUG), tandem stance (Self-Tandem), and Five Times Sit-to-Stand (Self-STS) tests.

objectiveThis study aimed to test the usability of 3 smartphone app-based self-tests of physical function using an iterative design.

methodsThe apps were tested in 3 iterations: the first (n=189) and second (n=134) in a lab setting and the third (n=20) in a separate home-based study. Participants were healthy adults between 60 and 80 years of age. Assessors observed while participants self-administered the tests without any guidance. Errors were recorded, and usability problems were defined. Problems were addressed in each subsequent iteration. Perceived usability in the home-based setting was assessed by use of the System Usability Scale, the User Experience Questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews.

resultsIn the first iteration, 7 usability problems were identified; 42 (42/189, 22.0%) and 127 (127/189, 67.2%) participants were able to correctly perform the Self-TUG and Self-Tandem, respectively. In the second iteration, errors caused by the problems identified in the first iteration were drastically reduced, and 108 (108/134, 83.1%) and 106 (106/134, 79.1%) of the participants correctly performed the Self-TUG and Self-Tandem, respectively. The first version of the Self-STS was also tested in this iteration, and 40 (40/134, 30.1%) of the participants performed it correctly. For the third usability test, the 7 usability problems initially identified were further improved. Testing the apps in a home setting gave rise to some new usability problems, and for Self-TUG and Self-STS, the rates of correctly performed trials were slightly reduced from the second version, while for Self-Tandem, the rate increased. The mean System Usability Scale score was 77.63 points (SD 16.1 points), and 80-95% of the participants reported the highest or second highest positive rating on all items in the User Experience Questionnaire.

conclusionsThe study results suggest that the apps have the potential to be used to self-test physical function in seniors in a nonsupervised home-based setting. The participants reported a high degree of ease of use. Evaluating the usability in a home setting allowed us to identify new usability problems that could affect the validity of the tests. These usability problems are not easily found in the lab setting, indicating that, if possible, app usability should be evaluated in both settings. Before being made available to end users, the apps require further improvements and validation.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPersons with DisabilitiesTelemedicineAgedHumansSmartphoneSurveys and QuestionnairesmHealth appolder peoplephysical functionseniorsusability

Identifiers

PMID32338616
PMCPMC7215517
OpenAlexW3008641171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.