ArticleBrazilian journal of physical therapy
User experiences of DiTA (dita.org.au): A database of studies of diagnostic test accuracy.
Article in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe DiTA database indexes primary studies and systematic reviews of the accuracy of diagnostic tests related to physical therapy; however, its usability has not been previously assessed.
objective(i) To assess the usability (layout, navigation, functionality, content) of DiTA for typical users working within physical therapy; (ii) to report the volume of user interaction with DiTA.
methodsA Think Aloud usability testing protocol was employed with 25 participants during screenshare teleconference interviews while performing DiTA search tasks. Participants then completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) online. Participants' comments and interpretations from transcribed interviews were coded into four usability categories. Anonymous data on website user behaviour since DiTA's inception were collected. The main outcome measures were frequency of comments per category with interpretations made during interviews, and SUS usability scores.
resultsParticipants most often commented about content (49 % of total), typically with positive sentiment. Participants also frequently commented on DiTA's functionality typically with negative sentiment. Misinterpretations during search tasks were commonly coded into the functionality category. The SUS score of 70.9 was above the usability benchmark for similar platforms. Participants thought they could learn to use DiTA quickly. Since its launch in 2019, DiTA has averaged 88 visits per day, accessed from almost every country in the world, with most users coming from Brazil.
conclusionTypical users rated DiTA's usability as above average, commenting frequently on its content and most often positively. DiTA's functionality was often misinterpreted during search tasks. Nevertheless, participants believed DiTA could be learnt quickly.
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.