Inal Yavuz, Wake Jo Dugstad, Guribye Frode, Nordgreen Tine
Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bergen, Norway.
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jan 6;22(1):e15337. doi: 10.2196/15337.
Many mobile health (mHealth) apps for mental health have been made available in recent years. Although there is reason to be optimistic about their effect on improving health and increasing access to care, there is a call for more knowledge concerning how mHealth apps are used in practice.
This study aimed to review the literature on how usability is being addressed and measured in mHealth interventions for mental health problems.
We conducted a systematic literature review through a search for peer-reviewed studies published between 2001 and 2018 in the following electronic databases: EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently assessed all abstracts against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines.
A total of 299 studies were initially identified based on the inclusion keywords. Following a review of the title, abstract, and full text, 42 studies were found that fulfilled the criteria, most of which evaluated usability with patients (n=29) and health care providers (n=11) as opposed to healthy users (n=8) and were directed at a wide variety of mental health problems (n=24). Half of the studies set out to evaluate usability (n=21), and the remainder focused on feasibility (n=10) or acceptability (n=10). Regarding the maturity of the evaluated systems, most were either prototypes or previously tested versions of the technology, and the studies included few accounts of sketching and participatory design processes. The most common reason referred to for developing mobile mental health apps was the availability of mobile devices to users, their popularity, and how people in general became accustomed to using them for various purposes.
This study provides a detailed account of how evidence of usability of mHealth apps is gathered in the form of usability evaluations from the perspective of computer science and human-computer interaction, including how users feature in the evaluation, how the study objectives and outcomes are stated, which research methods and techniques are used, and what the notion of mobility features is for mHealth apps. Most studies described their methods as trials, gathered data from a small sample size, and carried out a summative evaluation using a single questionnaire, which indicates that usability evaluation was not the main focus. As many studies described using an adapted version of a standard usability questionnaire, there may be a need for developing a standardized mHealth usability questionnaire.
近年来,许多用于心理健康的移动健康(mHealth)应用程序已可供使用。尽管有理由对它们在改善健康和增加医疗服务可及性方面的效果持乐观态度,但仍需要更多关于mHealth应用程序在实际中如何使用的知识。
本研究旨在回顾关于在针对心理健康问题的mHealth干预中如何解决和衡量可用性的文献。
我们通过搜索2001年至2018年间在以下电子数据库中发表的同行评审研究进行了系统的文献综述:EMBASE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、PubMed和科学网。两名评审员根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南,独立评估所有摘要是否符合纳入和排除标准。
根据纳入关键词,最初共识别出299项研究。在对标题、摘要和全文进行审查后,发现有42项研究符合标准,其中大多数研究评估了患者(n = 29)和医疗保健提供者(n = 11)的可用性,而非健康用户(n = 8),并且针对各种心理健康问题(n = 24)。一半的研究旨在评估可用性(n = 21),其余的则侧重于可行性(n = 10)或可接受性(n = 10)。关于所评估系统的成熟度,大多数是原型或该技术的先前测试版本,并且这些研究很少涉及草图绘制和参与式设计过程的描述。开发移动心理健康应用程序最常提到的原因是用户可使用移动设备、其受欢迎程度以及人们普遍如何习惯于将其用于各种目的。
本研究详细说明了如何从计算机科学和人机交互的角度,以可用性评估的形式收集mHealth应用程序可用性的证据,包括用户在评估中的特点、研究目标和结果如何陈述、使用了哪些研究方法和技术,以及mHealth应用程序的移动性特征概念是什么。大多数研究将其方法描述为试验,从小样本中收集数据,并使用单一问卷进行总结性评估,这表明可用性评估并非主要重点。由于许多研究描述使用了标准可用性问卷的改编版本,可能需要开发标准化的mHealth可用性问卷。