Heuristic evaluation and user tests of wearable mobile health monitoring applications: what results do different methods yield?

Bruna Santana Capeleti, João Ferreira, Gustavo Lopes Dominguete, M. Pereira, A. P. Freire
{"title":"Heuristic evaluation and user tests of wearable mobile health monitoring applications: what results do different methods yield?","authors":"Bruna Santana Capeleti, João Ferreira, Gustavo Lopes Dominguete, M. Pereira, A. P. Freire","doi":"10.1145/3424953.3426493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wearable smart bands connected to mobile apps in smartphones provide essential resources for health and activity monitoring. Evaluating this kind of application has many challenges, considering the mobile and wearable nature. This paper presents a comparative study employing heuristic evaluations and user tests of three health monitoring apps used with their wearable smart bands, to analyse the types of problems identified by each method. The study examined the Mi Band 2 with the MiFit app, the MTR-01 with the DayDay Band app, and Goral Y5 with the Lefun app. The apps and wearable smart bands were evaluated by three inspectors and employing user tests in a laboratory with a panel of 11 users simulating a short walk. After mapping similar problems encountered, the study found 18 problems by both methods, 27 problems encountered only by users, and 105 problems encountered only by the heuristic evaluations. The results in this study are relevant to inform designers about the types of problems in wearable health apps and devices using different methods, and research gaps to improve usability methods and resources to strengthen evaluations in this domain.","PeriodicalId":102113,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 19th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 19th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3424953.3426493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wearable smart bands connected to mobile apps in smartphones provide essential resources for health and activity monitoring. Evaluating this kind of application has many challenges, considering the mobile and wearable nature. This paper presents a comparative study employing heuristic evaluations and user tests of three health monitoring apps used with their wearable smart bands, to analyse the types of problems identified by each method. The study examined the Mi Band 2 with the MiFit app, the MTR-01 with the DayDay Band app, and Goral Y5 with the Lefun app. The apps and wearable smart bands were evaluated by three inspectors and employing user tests in a laboratory with a panel of 11 users simulating a short walk. After mapping similar problems encountered, the study found 18 problems by both methods, 27 problems encountered only by users, and 105 problems encountered only by the heuristic evaluations. The results in this study are relevant to inform designers about the types of problems in wearable health apps and devices using different methods, and research gaps to improve usability methods and resources to strengthen evaluations in this domain.
启发式评估和可穿戴移动健康监测应用的用户测试:不同的方法产生什么结果?
与智能手机中的移动应用程序相连的可穿戴智能手环为健康和活动监测提供了必要的资源。考虑到移动和可穿戴的性质,评估这种应用程序面临许多挑战。本文提出了一项比较研究,采用启发式评估和用户测试的三种健康监测应用程序与其可穿戴智能手环一起使用,以分析每种方法识别的问题类型。该研究测试了带有MiFit应用程序的小米手环2、带有DayDay手环应用程序的小米手环01和带有乐fun应用程序的小米手环Y5。这些应用程序和可穿戴智能手环由三名检查员进行评估,并在实验室进行用户测试,由11名用户组成的小组模拟短途步行。在对遇到的相似问题进行映射后,研究发现两种方法都有18个问题,用户单独遇到的问题27个,启发式评估单独遇到的问题105个。本研究的结果具有相关性,可以让设计师了解使用不同方法的可穿戴健康应用和设备存在的问题类型,并研究差距,以改进可用性方法和资源,以加强该领域的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信