ReviewDigital health
A systematic review of user-based usability testing practices in self-care mHealth apps.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 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
- Augmented Reality-Guided Decision Support in Simulated Pediatric Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Usability and Technology Acceptance of a Wearable Monitoring System Among Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Perceived Usability as a Factor Associated with Clinical Outcomes in Mobile Health Diabetes Management: A Bayesian Mediation and Equity Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Considerations for mHealth development: lessons learned from two diabetes education apps.mHealth · 2026Article
- Navigating the DiGA jungle: A taxonomy and archetypal framework of the German digital therapeutics landscape.Digital healthArticle
- Evaluating a Digital Patient Reported Outcome Measure for Long COVID in a Community Rehabilitation Service.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Self-care mobile health (mHealth) apps empower users to manage their health independently by supporting symptom tracking, medication adherence, and lifestyle changes. Given the limitations of mobile platforms, such as small screens and limited input capabilities, usability is a critical factor influencing the successful adoption of these apps. Methods: This article presents a systematic review of user-based usability testing practices in self-care mHealth applications. A total of 68 primary studies were retrieved and analyzed from the Scopus database, published between 2014 and 2024, following established systematic review protocols. Results: The review revealed a growing research interest in usability testing for self-care mHealth apps. Usability testing commonly employs mixed-method approaches, combining standardized questionnaires, such as the System Usability Scale, with qualitative methods (think-aloud protocols and interviews). A diverse group of participants, including patients and healthcare professionals, was used for testing. Testing was conducted in both controlled (labs and hospitals) and uncontrolled (homes) environments. The core usability attributes, ease of use, engagement, and satisfaction, were widely used. Conclusion: The review offers actionable insights for researchers seeking to improve the usability of self-care applications. Further research is needed in several directions: justifying the appropriate sample size for participants, expanding the scope of usability testing to include underexplored attributes, and conducting longitudinal usability studies, and so on.
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.