Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42789783›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2026

User Satisfaction With Assistive, Rehabilitation, and Training Technologies: Questionnaire Development and Content Validation Study.

Oskar Cvjetičanin, Ivana Marić, Nejc Šarabon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Oskar Cvjetičanin *Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Polje 42, Izola, 6310, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-1884-5787
Ivana Marić *Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Polje 42, Izola, 6310, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-9330-0335
Nejc ŠarabonFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Polje 42, Izola, 6310, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0747-3735

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: According to human-centered design principles, user experience and user satisfaction are key aspects when developing or providing patients and clients with assistive, rehabilitation, or training technologies. Existing tools for assessing user experience and satisfaction are often either too narrow (developed for specific technologies) or too broad, failing to capture all relevant aspects of the technology being evaluated. Objective: The main objective of this study was to present the development process and content validation of a questionnaire that, following further validation steps, could be useful for researchers and developers in assessing the satisfaction of direct end users with assistive, rehabilitation, and training technologies. Methods: The development of the User Satisfaction Questionnaire for Assistive, Rehabilitation, and Training Technologies (U-ART-Q) followed a multistep process: (1) literature review, (2) domain definition and item generation, (3) expert consultation, (4) linguistic validation, and (5) content validation. Initially, 72 items were generated and organized into 7 domains. After expert review and linguistic validation, the questionnaire underwent content validation by 8 experts in physiotherapy, kinesiology, and ergonomics. Each item was rated for relevance using a 4-point Likert-type scale. The content validity ratio (CVR) and item-level content validity index (I-CVI) were calculated, and items below the accepted thresholds were removed or further revised. Results: Expert consultation resulted in the removal or merging of 20 items to improve clarity and reduce redundancy. Of the 52 items evaluated during content validation, 44 met the CVR and I-CVI criteria (CVR >0.75 and I-CVI >0.78). Eight items required additional review, and 2 items were ultimately removed. The final questionnaire comprises 10 initial screening questions and 50 content-valid items across 7 domains: design, comfort, effectiveness and usefulness, service, treatment or exercise, overall impressions, and safety. The overall average content validity index was 0.915, providing evidence of strong content validity. A macro-enabled Excel tool was developed to automate item selection and generate a PDF version of the questionnaire based on initial screening responses. Conclusions: The U-ART-Q is a newly developed instrument for assessing user satisfaction with assistive, rehabilitation, and training technologies. Further research will focus on psychometric evaluation, reliability testing, and multilingual validation to determine whether the U-ART-Q can provide a standardized method for assessing user satisfaction. Once fully evaluated, the questionnaire could support both developmental usability testing and postmarket evaluation, facilitating evidence-based decision-making and guiding future product improvement.

Indexed as

assistive technologyhuman-centered designquestionnaire developmentrehabilitation technologytraining technologyuser-centered designuser satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID42789783
PMCPMC13614623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.