| Title |
Reusable Software Usability Specifications for mHealth Applications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-018-0902-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Belén Cruz Zapata, José Luis Fernández-Alemán, Ambrosio Toval, Ali Idri |
| Abstract |
One of the key factors for the adoption of mobile technologies, and in particular of mobile health applications, is usability. A usable application will be easier to use and understand by users, and will improve user's interaction with it. This paper proposes a software requirements catalog for usable mobile health applications, which can be used for the development of new applications, or the evaluation of existing ones. The catalog is based on the main identified sources in literature on usability and mobile health applications. Our catalog was organized according to the ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2011 standard and follows the SIREN methodology to create reusable catalogs. The applicability of the catalog was verified by the creation of an audit method, which was used to perform the evaluation of a real app, S Health, application created by Samsung Electronics Co. The usability requirements catalog, along with the audit method, identified several usability flaws on the evaluated app, which scored 83%. Some flaws were detected in the app related to the navigation pattern. Some more issues related to the startup experience, empty screens or writing style were also found. The way a user navigates through an application improves or deteriorates user's experience with the application. We proposed a reusable usability catalog and an audit method. This proposal was used to evaluate a mobile health application. An audit report was created with the usability issues identified on the evaluated application. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| France | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 27 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 25 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Engineering | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2018.
All research outputs
#6,811,183
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#244
of 1,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,415
of 441,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,162 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.