Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37976096›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

A Novel System for the Device-Based Measurement of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Sleep (Motus): Usability Evaluation.

Patrick Crowley, Rasmus Kildedal, Simon Overvad Vindelev, Sandra Schade Jacobsen, Jon Roslyng Larsen, Peter J Johansson, Mette Aadahl, Leon Straker, Emmanuel Stamatakis, Andreas Holtermann and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Patrick CrowleyThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4222-5091
Rasmus KildedalThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4396-5668
Simon Overvad VindelevThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8910-7207
Sandra Schade JacobsenThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6927-4382
Jon Roslyng LarsenThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0373-9305
Peter J JohanssonDepartment of Medical Sciences, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9354-6704
Mette AadahlCenter for Clinical Research and Prevention, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5904-9747
Leon StrakerSchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7786-4128
Emmanuel StamatakisCharles Perkins Centre, Mackenzie Wearables Research Hub, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7323-3225
Andreas HoltermannThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4825-5697
Paul Jarle MorkDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3355-2680
Nidhi GuptaThe National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0035-9342
National Research Centre for the Working Environment · DKCurtin University · AUNorwegian University of Science and Technology · NOThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDevice-based measurements of physical behavior, using the current methods, place a large burden on participants. The Motus system could reduce this burden by removing the necessity for in-person meetings, replacing diaries written on paper with digital diaries, and increasing the automation of feedback generation.

objectiveThis study aims to describe the development of the Motus system and evaluate its potential to reduce participant burden in a two-phase usability evaluation.

methodsMotus was developed around (1) a thigh-worn accelerometer with Bluetooth data transfer; (2) a smartphone app containing an attachment guide, a digital diary, and facilitating automated data transfer; (3) a cloud infrastructure for data storage; (4) an analysis software to generate feedback for participants; and (5) a web-based app for administrators. We recruited 19 adults with a mean age of 45 (SD 11; range 27-63) years, of which 11 were female, to assist in the two-phase evaluation of Motus. A total of 7 participants evaluated the usability of mockups for a smartphone app in phase 1. Participants interacted with the app while thinking aloud, and any issues raised were classified as critical, serious, or minor by observers. This information was used to create an improved and functional smartphone app for evaluation in phase 2. A total of 12 participants completed a 7-day free-living measurement with Motus in phase 2. On day 1, participants attempted 20 system-related tasks under observation, including registration on the study web page, reading the information letter, downloading and navigating the smartphone app, attaching an accelerometer on the thigh, and completing a diary entry for both work and sleep hours. Task completion success and any issues encountered were noted by the observer. On completion of the 7-day measurement, participants provided a rating from 0 to 100 on the System Usability Scale and participated in a semistructured interview aimed at understanding their experience in more detail.

resultsThe task completion rate for the 20 tasks was 100% for 13 tasks, >80% for 4 tasks, and <50% for 3 tasks. The average rating of system usability was 86 on a 0-100 scale. Thematic analysis indicated that participants perceived the system as easy to use and remember, and subjectively pleasing overall. Participants with shift work reported difficulty with entering sleep hours, and 66% (8/12) of the participants experienced slow data transfer between the app and the cloud infrastructure. Finally, a few participants desired a greater degree of detail in the generated feedback.

conclusionsOur two-phase usability evaluation indicated that the overall usability of the Motus system is high in free-living. Issues around the system's slow data transfer, participants with atypical work shifts, and the degree of automation and detail of generated feedback should be addressed in future iterations of the Motus system. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/35697.

Indexed as

accelerometeraccelerometryappapplicationdesigndevelopmentdiaryexercisemhealthmobile healthmonitormonitoringphysical activitysedentarysleepthematic analysisusability

Identifiers

PMID37976096
PMCPMC10692873
OpenAlexW4387194088

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.