Evidence mapPaperPMID 38564261Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2024

Evaluating the Usability of an mHealth App for Empowering Cancer Survivors With Disabilities: Heuristic Evaluation and Usability Testing.

Rachel F Adler, Kevin Baez, Paulina Morales, Jocelyn Sotelo, David Victorson, Susan Magasi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Co-Creation in the Development of Digital Therapeutics: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel F AdlerDepartment of Computer Science, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0462-5716
Kevin BaezDepartment of Computer Science, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-1910-4948
Paulina MoralesDepartment of Computer Science, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3652-1396
Jocelyn SoteloDepartment of Computer Science, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4018-695X
David VictorsonDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3530-8633
Susan MagasiDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6386-2386
Northeastern Illinois University · USNorthwestern University · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

NCI NIH HHS U54 CA202995NCI NIH HHS U54 CA202997NCI NIH HHS U54 CA203000
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than 18 million cancer survivors are living in the United States. The effects of cancer and its treatments can have cognitive, psychological, physical, and social consequences that many survivors find incredibly disabling. Posttreatment support is often unavailable or underused, especially for survivors living with disabilities. This leaves them to deal with new obstacles and struggles on their own, oftentimes feeling lost during this transition. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been shown to effectively aid cancer survivors in dealing with many of the aftereffects of cancer and its treatments; these interventions hold immense potential for survivors living with disabilities. We developed a prototype for WeCanManage, an mHealth-delivered self-management intervention to empower cancer survivors living with disabilities through problem-solving, mindfulness, and self-advocacy training.

objectiveOur study conducted a heuristic evaluation of the WeCanManage high-fidelity prototype and assessed its usability among cancer survivors with known disabilities.

methodsWe evaluated the prototype using Nielsen's 10 principles of heuristic evaluation with 22 human-computer interaction university students. On the basis of the heuristic evaluation findings, we modified the prototype and conducted usability testing on 10 cancer survivors with a variety of known disabilities, examining effectiveness, efficiency, usability, and satisfaction, including a completion of the modified System Usability Scale (SUS).

resultsThe findings from the heuristic evaluation were mostly favorable, highlighting the need for a help guide, addressing accessibility concerns, and enhancing the navigation experience. After usability testing, the average SUS score was 81, indicating a good-excellent design. The participants in the usability testing sample expressed positive reactions toward the app's design, educational content and videos, and the available means of connecting with others. They identified areas for improvement, such as improving accessibility, simplifying navigation within the community forums, and providing a more convenient method to access the help guide.

conclusionsOverall, usability testing showed positive results for the design of WeCanManage. The course content and features helped participants feel heard, understood, and less alone.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsMobile ApplicationsNeoplasmsHeuristicsHumansPower, PsychologicalUser-Centered DesignUser-Computer Interfaceaccessibilityadvocacyappscancercancer survivorsdisabilitiesempowermentheuristicsmHealthmindfulnessmobile healthoncologyproblem-solvingusability

Identifiers

PMID38564261
PMCPMC11022134
OpenAlexW4393716598

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.