ArticleJMIR formative research2025
User-Centered Formative Evaluation of Cognitive Rehabilitation Software: Cognitive Walkthrough and System Usability Scale Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe usability of software as a medical device plays a critical role in ensuring patient safety, clinical effectiveness, and treatment adherence. Particularly in tablet-based cognitive rehabilitation software, poor usability can increase the risk of user errors, cognitive overload, and low engagement, which may diminish therapeutic outcomes. Despite the growing integration of cognitive rehabilitation software in clinical settings, few studies have systematically evaluated its usability using structured human factor methodologies.
objectiveThis study aimed to conduct a formative evaluation of a tablet-based cognitive rehabilitation software by identifying potential user errors, interface design issues, and opportunities for improving the user experience and user interface (UI).
methodsFollowing the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62366-1 framework for usability engineering, a formative evaluation was conducted using a combination of cognitive walkthrough (CW) and the System Usability Scale (SUS). CW was used to identify interaction breakdowns and potential use-related problems through scenario-based expert evaluation. The SUS was administered to quantitatively assess perceived usability. Five occupational therapists with experience in cognitive rehabilitation participated in the formative evaluation.
resultsA total of 14 usability issues were identified across 6 task scenarios. Common problems included difficulty locating buttons, insufficient feedback during task completion, and inconsistent UI behavior. Key improvement areas included keypad layout, visibility of task progress, and accessibility of help content. The mean SUS score was 73.5 (SD 11.4), indicating an acceptable usability level (grade of B-). The lowest scores were related to system complexity and interface integration, suggesting a need to optimize UI flow and content hierarchy.
conclusionsThe combined use of CW and the SUS enabled the identification of both objective and perceived usability challenges in the cognitive rehabilitation software. Findings emphasize the importance of user-centered design and formative evaluation in the early stages of software development. Recommendations such as improving information visibility, reducing unnecessary steps, and enhancing system feedback may contribute to safer and more effective digital cognitive interventions. However, given the small and homogeneous participant sample and the controlled test environment, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary. This study highlights the practical application of the IEC 62366-1 framework in evaluating software as a medical device and demonstrates its utility in guiding iterative user experience and UI improvements in cognitive rehabilitation contexts.
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.