An Iterative, Mixed Usability Approach Applied to the Telekit System from the Danish TeleCare North Trial

IF 3.1 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
P. H. Lilholt, Clara Schaarup, O. Hejlesen
{"title":"An Iterative, Mixed Usability Approach Applied to the Telekit System from the Danish TeleCare North Trial","authors":"P. H. Lilholt, Clara Schaarup, O. Hejlesen","doi":"10.1155/2016/6351734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the usability of the telehealth system, coined Telekit, by using an iterative, mixed usability approach. Materials and Methods. Ten double experts participated in two heuristic evaluations (HE1, HE2), and 11 COPD patients attended two think-aloud tests. The double experts identified usability violations and classified them into Jakob Nielsen's heuristics. These violations were then translated into measurable values on a scale of 0 to 4 indicating degree of severity. In the think-aloud tests, COPD participants were invited to verbalise their thoughts. Results. The double experts identified 86 usability violations in HE1 and 101 usability violations in HE2. The majority of the violations were rated in the 0–2 range. The findings from the think-aloud tests resulted in 12 themes and associated examples regarding the usability of the Telekit system. The use of the iterative, mixed usability approach produced both quantitative and qualitative results. Conclusion. The iterative, mixed usability approach yields a strong result owing to the high number of problems identified in the tests because the double experts and the COPD participants focus on different aspects of Telekit's usability. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01984840, November 14, 2013.","PeriodicalId":45630,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications","volume":"2016 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/6351734","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6351734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the usability of the telehealth system, coined Telekit, by using an iterative, mixed usability approach. Materials and Methods. Ten double experts participated in two heuristic evaluations (HE1, HE2), and 11 COPD patients attended two think-aloud tests. The double experts identified usability violations and classified them into Jakob Nielsen's heuristics. These violations were then translated into measurable values on a scale of 0 to 4 indicating degree of severity. In the think-aloud tests, COPD participants were invited to verbalise their thoughts. Results. The double experts identified 86 usability violations in HE1 and 101 usability violations in HE2. The majority of the violations were rated in the 0–2 range. The findings from the think-aloud tests resulted in 12 themes and associated examples regarding the usability of the Telekit system. The use of the iterative, mixed usability approach produced both quantitative and qualitative results. Conclusion. The iterative, mixed usability approach yields a strong result owing to the high number of problems identified in the tests because the double experts and the COPD participants focus on different aspects of Telekit's usability. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01984840, November 14, 2013.
一种迭代、混合可用性方法应用于Telekit系统,来自丹麦telemare North试验
目标。本研究的目的是评估远程医疗系统的可用性,创造Telekit,通过使用迭代,混合可用性方法。材料与方法。10名双专家参与了2项启发式评估(HE1、HE2), 11名COPD患者参加了2项有声思维测试。双重专家确定了可用性违规,并将其分类为Jakob Nielsen的启发式。然后将这些违规行为转换为可测量的值,其范围为0到4,表示严重程度。在大声思考测试中,COPD参与者被邀请用语言表达他们的想法。结果。双重专家在HE1中确定了86个可用性违规,在HE2中确定了101个可用性违规。大多数违规行为的评分在0-2之间。有声思维测试的结果产生了关于Telekit系统可用性的12个主题和相关示例。迭代、混合可用性方法的使用产生了定量和定性的结果。结论。由于双重专家和COPD参与者关注Telekit可用性的不同方面,因此在测试中发现了大量问题,因此迭代的混合可用性方法产生了强有力的结果。该试验已在Clinicaltrials.gov注册,编号NCT01984840, 2013年11月14日。
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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.30%
发文量
19
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The overall aim of the International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications is to bring together science and applications of medical practice and medical care at a distance as well as their supporting technologies such as, computing, communications, and networking technologies with emphasis on telemedicine techniques and telemedicine applications. It is directed at practicing engineers, academic researchers, as well as doctors, nurses, etc. Telemedicine is an information technology that enables doctors to perform medical consultations, diagnoses, and treatments, as well as medical education, away from patients. For example, doctors can remotely examine patients via remote viewing monitors and sound devices, and/or sampling physiological data using telecommunication. Telemedicine technology is applied to areas of emergency healthcare, videoconsulting, telecardiology, telepathology, teledermatology, teleophthalmology, teleoncology, telepsychiatry, teledentistry, etc. International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications will highlight the continued growth and new challenges in telemedicine, applications, and their supporting technologies, for both application development and basic research. Papers should emphasize original results or case studies relating to the theory and/or applications of telemedicine. Tutorial papers, especially those emphasizing multidisciplinary views of telemedicine, are also welcome. International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications employs a paperless, electronic submission and evaluation system to promote a rapid turnaround in the peer-review process.
×
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