ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Development and Systematic Evaluation of a Progressive Web Application for Women With Cardiac Pain: Usability Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Usability and User Experience Assessment of Health Care Conversational Agents Using Validated Subjective Instruments: Systematic Review and Comparative Analysis.JMIR human factors · 2026Pooled it
- TeleGlaukos: A Clinician-Led Adaptive Telemonitoring Platform for Hybrid Glaucoma Care.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac pain has been widely considered to be the primary indicator of coronary artery disease. The presentation of cardiac pain and associated symptoms vary in women, making it challenging to interpret as cardiac, possibly cardiac, or noncardiac. Women prefer to consult with family and friends instead of seeking immediate medical care.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the user performance (ie, ease of use, efficiency, and errors) and user satisfaction (System Usability Scale; SUS) of a progressive web application for women with cardiac pain.
methodsFollowing ethics approval, a purposive sample of women aged >18 years with cardiac pain or associated symptoms lasting >3 months and able to speak and read English was recruited to participate in 2 iterative usability testing cycles. The first cycle assessed the performance of and satisfaction with at heart using a web application, and the second cycle assessed the performance of and satisfaction with at heart across various Android and iOS devices. In total, 2 investigators recorded user comments and documented problems. At the end of the testing session, the participants completed the SUS and 4 semistructured interview questions.
resultsIn total, 10 eligible women participated in usability testing from March 31, 2020, to April 17, 2020 (cycle 1), and from November 17, 2020, to November 30, 2020 (cycle 2). Women across usability testing cycles had a mean age of 55.6 (SD 7.3) years, and most (9/10, 90%) were well educated. In total, 50% (5/10) were employed full or part time, and 60% (6/10) earned >CAD $70,000 (US $48,881.80) annually. Participants across 2 testing cycles reported the overall usability of the at heart progressive web application as highly acceptable (mean SUS score 81.75, SD 10.41). In total, 90% (9/10) of participants rated the user-friendliness of at heart as good or excellent. All participants (10/10, 100%) thought at heart was easy to use and efficient. Only 2 testing errors were noted as high priority; these were low contrast or small font and clarification that the chatbot was not a real person. User satisfaction was assessed using themes that emerged from the debrief and 4 semistructured interview questions; at heart was engaging, comprehensive, understandable, credible, relevant, affirming, personalized, and innovative.
conclusionsThis study provides initial support for the at heart progressive web application for women living with cardiac pain and symptoms. Ongoing evaluations in phases 3 and 4 should aim to examine the feasibility and acceptability of and the extent of engagement with the at heart core feature set: Heart Check, Wellness Check, and the library. In addition to assessing effectiveness in the phase-4 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial (type I), describing and better understanding the context for implementation (eg, race and ethnicity and geography) will be necessary. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033092.
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.