Evidence mapPaperPMID 41875407Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2026

Development and Formative Usability Evaluation of a Theory-Driven Progressive Web Application for Young Adult Wellness Engagement (MiCARE): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

Ayesha Thanthrige, Nilmini Wickramasinghe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 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

2 authors.

Ayesha ThanthrigeSchool of Computing, Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, La Trobe University, Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia, 61 430 601 237.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-0518-2849
Nilmini WickramasingheSchool of Computing, Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, La Trobe University, Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia, 61 430 601 237.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1314-8843

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Young adults face rising wellness challenges, including prediabetes risk, requiring sustained engagement with preventive health interventions. Digital wellness applications offer promise for promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors, yet high dropout rates and inadequate personalization limit their effectiveness. This paper outlines the technical implementation and formative usability evaluation of MiCARE, a theory-driven progressive web application (PWA) designed to support sustained wellness engagement among young adults through user-centered design. Objective: This study aims to systematically implement theory-driven design specifications into a functional web application, the MiCARE platform, and to conduct a formative usability evaluation with a convenience sample of 20 university-affiliated young adults aged 18 to 34 years in Victoria, Australia, in both rural and urban areas using the task-technology fit and unified theory of acceptance and use of technology frameworks as organizing lenses to assess usability, usefulness, and satisfaction. Methods: This is an embedded mixed methods study conducted across 2 phases: phase 3 and phase 4. Phase 3 involves the technical implementation of 6 theory-driven features (ie, empathetic chatbot, learning hub, dynamic goal setting, gamification, personalized reminders, and progress dashboard) using HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Dialogflow ES, and Firebase services, following the Agile methodology over 6 months with biweekly self-managed sprints and clinical verification. Phase 4 is a 3-month formative usability feasibility evaluation with 20 young adults recruited from La Trobe University (Bundoora and Bendigo campuses). Participants will complete screening and initial, midpoint, and final surveys assessing usability, usefulness, and satisfaction, while real-time use analytics captures engagement patterns. Data analysis will use the task-technology fit and unified theory of acceptance and use of technology frameworks as interpretive guides, with quantitative data analyzed using descriptive statistics (R Studio) and qualitative feedback analyzed through thematic analysis (NVivo). Use analytics will provide descriptive contextual information only. The study has received ethics approval from the La Trobe University Human Research Ethics Committee (HEC24507). Results: The study will take place between 2025 and 2026. Phase 3 (technical implementation) commenced in October 2025 and is currently ongoing, with core features under active development and verification. Phase 4 (formative usability and feasibility evaluation) is scheduled to commence following completion of phase 3. Evaluation results will be disseminated in academic forums and peer-reviewed publications in early 2027. The findings will enable us to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a theory-driven PWA in this university-affiliated sample, informing refinements and future larger-scale studies. Conclusions: This study will contribute to the technical implementation and formative usability evaluation of a multitheoretical, user-centered PWA for wellness engagement in preventive health, bridging the gap between conceptual frameworks and deployed interventions.

Indexed as

Health PromotionAdolescentAdultDigital HealthFemaleHumansInternetMaleVictoriaYoung Adultdigital health interventionformative usability evaluationmixed methods studyprediabetes preventionprogressive web applicationself-determination theorytask-technology fitunified theory of acceptance and use of technologywellness engagementyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID41875407
PMCPMC13012608

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.