Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40357428›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Psychometric evaluation of the System Usability Scale in the context of a childrearing app co-designed for low- and middle-income countries.

Qaisar Khan, Ian B Hickie, Victoria Loblay, Mahalakshmi Ekambareshwar, Iqthyer Uddin Md Zahed, Aila Naderbagi, Yun Jc Song, Haley M LaMonica

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Evaluation of the uptake and usability of the pregnant women surveillance system (SIMG): A cross-sectional pilot study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

8 authors.

Qaisar KhanYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9689-1666
Ian B HickieYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Victoria LoblayYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4094-9619
Mahalakshmi EkambareshwarYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1936-7120
Iqthyer Uddin Md ZahedYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Aila NaderbagiYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9558-1142
Yun Jc SongYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Haley M LaMonicaYouth Mental Health and Technology Team, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6563-5467

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The System Usability Scale (SUS) demonstrates good psychometric properties for a range of technologies; however, its reliability and factor structure in the context of a childrearing application (app) and variation across cultures remains largely unexplored. This study investigates the reliability and factor structure of the SUS in the context of a childrearing app that was co-designed for and implemented in diverse low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: Parents and caregivers of children aged 0-5 years in five LMICs completed the SUS after having access to the app for a minimum of 2 and maximum of 24 weeks. Survey data from participants ( Results: The bi-factor model shows the best fit to data (comparative fit index = 0.998; Tucker Lewis Index = 0.996; standardised root mean square residual = 0.033). Further analysis suggests that usability and learnability subscales provide additional information not contained in the total SUS score. A two-sample Conclusion: The SUS has good psychometric properties, and it is a valid and reliable tool for assessing the usability of mobile apps when used by parents and other caregivers for children's socioemotional and cognitive development. However, it is not essentially unidimensional and appears to have a multidimensional structure that could be specific to our context owing to variations in users' experience, culture, and language. The findings have implications for other mobile health interventions implemented in contexts with cultural and linguistic differences.

Indexed as

Digital technologyearly childhood developmentglobal healthimpact evaluationmobile appparenting progamsystem usability

Identifiers

PMID40357428
PMCPMC12066864

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.