Dataset Information

Establishing a Working Definition of User Experience for eHealth Interventions of Self-reported User Experience Measures With eHealth Researchers and Adolescents: Scoping Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Across eHealth intervention studies involving children, adolescents, and their parents, researchers have measured user experience to assist with intervention development, refinement, and evaluation. To date, no widely accepted definitions or measures of user experience exist to support a standardized approach for evaluation and comparison within or across interventions.

Objective

We conduct a scoping review with subsequent Delphi consultation to identify how user experience is defined and measured in eHealth research studies, characterize the measurement tools used, and establish working definitions for domains of user experience that could be used in future eHealth evaluations.

Methods

We systematically searched electronic databases for published and gray literature available from January 1, 2005, to April 11, 2019. We included studies assessing an eHealth intervention that targeted any health condition and was designed for use by children, adolescents, and their parents. eHealth interventions needed to be web-, computer-, or mobile-based, mediated by the internet with some degree of interactivity. We required studies to report the measurement of user experience as first-person experiences, involving cognitive and behavioral factors reported by intervention users. We appraised the quality of user experience measures in included studies using published criteria: well-established, approaching well-established, promising, or not yet established. We conducted a descriptive analysis of how user experience was defined and measured in each study. Review findings subsequently informed the survey questions used in the Delphi consultations with eHealth researchers and adolescent users for how user experience should be defined and measured.

Results

Of the 8634 articles screened for eligibility, 129 articles and 1 erratum were included in the review. A total of 30 eHealth researchers and 27 adolescents participated in the Delphi consultations. On the basis of the literature and consultations, we proposed working definitions for 6 main user experience domains: acceptability, satisfaction, credibility, usability, user-reported adherence, and perceived impact. Although most studies incorporated a study-specific measure, we identified 10 well-established measures to quantify 5 of the 6 domains of user experience (all except for self-reported adherence). Our adolescent and researcher participants ranked perceived impact as one of the most important domains of user experience and usability as one of the least important domains. Rankings between adolescents and researchers diverged for other domains.

Conclusions

Findings highlight the various ways in which user experience has been defined and measured across studies and what aspects are most valued by researchers and adolescent users. We propose incorporating the working definitions and available measures of user experience to support consistent evaluation and reporting of outcomes across studies. Future studies can refine the definitions and measurement of user experience, explore how user experience relates to other eHealth outcomes, and inform the design and use of human-centered eHealth interventions.

SUBMITTER: Newton AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8686463 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had global impacts and caused some health systems to experience substantial pressure. The need for accurate health information has been felt widely. Chatbots have great potential to reach people with authoritative information, and a number of chatbots have been quickly developed to disseminate information about COVID-19. However, little is known about user experiences of and perspectives on these tools.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe what is known about the user experience and user uptake of COVID-19 chatbots.MethodsA scoping review was carried out in June 2021 using keywords to cover the literature concerning chatbots, user engagement, and COVID-19. The search strategy included databases covering health, communication, marketing, and the COVID-19 pandemic specifically, including MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, Emerald, and EBSCO. Studies that assessed the design, marketing, and user features of COVID-19 chatbots or those that explored user perspectives and experience were included. We excluded papers that were not related to COVID-19; did not include any reporting on user perspectives, experience, or the general use of chatbot features or marketing; or where a version was not available in English. The authors independently screened results for inclusion, using both backward and forward citation checking of the included papers. A thematic analysis was carried out with the included papers.ResultsA total of 517 papers were sourced from the literature, and 10 were included in the final review. Our scoping review identified a number of factors impacting adoption and engagement including content, trust, digital ability, and acceptability. The papers included discussions about chatbots developed for COVID-19 screening and general COVID-19 information, as well as studies investigating user perceptions and opinions on COVID-19 chatbots.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique and specific challenge for digital health interventions. Design and implementation were required at a rapid speed as digital health service adoption accelerated globally. Chatbots for COVID-19 have been developed quickly as the pandemic has challenged health systems. There is a need for more comprehensive and routine reporting of factors impacting adoption and engagement. This paper has shown both the potential of chatbots to reach users in an emergency and the need to better understand how users engage and what they want.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual assistants can be used to deliver innovative health programs that provide appealing, personalized, and convenient health advice and support at scale and low cost. Design characteristics that influence the look and feel of the virtual assistant, such as visual appearance or language features, may significantly influence users' experience and engagement with the assistant.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to provide an overview of the experimental research examining how design characteristics of virtual health assistants affect user experience, summarize research findings of experimental research examining how design characteristics of virtual health assistants affect user experience, and provide recommendations for the design of virtual health assistants if sufficient evidence exists.MethodsWe searched 5 electronic databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and ACM Digital Library) to identify the studies that used an experimental design to compare the effects of design characteristics between 2 or more versions of an interactive virtual health assistant on user experience among adults. Data were synthesized descriptively. Health domains, design characteristics, and outcomes were categorized, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the body of research. Results for each study were categorized as positive, negative, or no effect, and a matrix of the design characteristics and outcome categories was constructed to summarize the findings.ResultsThe database searches identified 6879 articles after the removal of duplicates. We included 48 articles representing 45 unique studies in the review. The most common health domains were mental health and physical activity. Studies most commonly examined design characteristics in the categories of visual design or conversational style and relational behavior and assessed outcomes in the categories of personality, satisfaction, relationship, or use intention. Over half of the design characteristics were examined by only 1 study. Results suggest that empathy and relational behavior and self-disclosure are related to more positive user experience. Results also suggest that if a human-like avatar is used, realistic rendering and medical attire may potentially be related to more positive user experience; however, more research is needed to confirm this.ConclusionsThere is a growing body of scientific evidence examining the impact of virtual health assistants' design characteristics on user experience. Taken together, data suggest that the look and feel of a virtual health assistant does affect user experience. Virtual health assistants that show empathy, display nonverbal relational behaviors, and disclose personal information about themselves achieve better user experience. At present, the evidence base is broad, and the studies are typically small in scale and highly heterogeneous. Further research, particularly using longitudinal research designs with repeated user interactions, is needed to inform the optimal design of virtual health assistants.

Project description:BackgroundThe implementation of eHealth in low-resource countries (LRCs) is challenged by limited resources and infrastructure, lack of focus on eHealth agendas, ethical and legal considerations, lack of common system interoperability standards, unreliable power, and shortage of trained workers.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to describe and study the current situation of eHealth implementation in a small number of LRCs from the perspectives of their professional eHealth users.MethodsWe developed a structural equation model that reflects the opinions of professional eHealth users who work on LRC health care front lines. We recruited country coordinators from 4 LRCs to help recruit survey participants: India, Egypt, Nigeria, and Kenya. Through a web-based survey that focused on barriers to eHealth implementation, we surveyed 114 participants. We analyzed the information using a structural equation model to determine the relationships among the constructs in the model, including the dependent variable, eHealth utilization.ResultsAlthough all the model constructs were important to participants, some constructs, such as user characteristics, perceived privacy, and perceived security, did not play a significant role in eHealth utilization. However, the constructs related to technology infrastructure tended to reduce the impact of concerns and uncertainties (path coefficient=-0.32; P=.001), which had a negative impact on eHealth utilization (path coefficient=-0.24; P=.01). Constructs that were positively related to eHealth utilization were implementation effectiveness (path coefficient=0.45; P<.001), the countries where participants worked (path coefficient=0.29; P=.004), and whether they worked for privately or publicly funded institutions (path coefficient=0.18; P<.001). As exploratory research, the model had a moderately good fit for eHealth utilization (adjusted R2=0.42).ConclusionseHealth success factors can be categorized into 5 groups; our study focused on frontline eHealth workers' opinions concerning 2 of these groups: technology and its support infrastructure and user acceptance. We found significant disparities among the responses from different participant groups. Privately funded organizations tended to be further ahead with eHealth utilization than those that were publicly funded. Moreover, participant comments identified the need for more use of telemedicine in remote and rural regions in these countries. An understanding of these differences can help regions or countries that are lagging in the implementation and use of eHealth technologies. Our approach could also be applied to detailed studies of the other 3 categories of success factors: short- and long-term funding, organizational factors, and political or legislative aspects.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Retinoblastoma is a childhood retinal cancer with lifelong consequences such as vision loss and increased risk of second cancer. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are instruments that measure outcomes related to health directly reported by patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the scope, characteristics and quality of PROMs used in retinoblastoma and related fields of pediatric ophthalmology and pediatric oncology. METHODS:Databases MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies in the English language that reported on PROMs used in retinoblastoma, pediatric oncology, or pediatric ophthalmology; grey literature and studies reporting on developmental PROM phases were excluded. PROMs were grouped by the construct measured and domains assessed, and classified as condition-specific or generic. A subsequent search was then conducted in MEDLINE and Embase for studies assessing measurement properties of the identified PROMs. PROMs with associated studies were assessed for their methodologic quality using the COnsensus-based standard for the Selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) strategy. RESULTS:Among 110 eligible studies uncovered by the database searches, 143 PROMs were identified: one retinoblastoma-specific, 56 ophthalmology- and 86 oncology-related. The most common construct measured was 'health-related quality of life' and the most common domain assessed was emotional well-being. Of the 143 PROMs, 100 had associated validation studies; the one retinoblastoma-specific PROM was not validated. Quality assessment revealed 34/100 PROMs received a score of sufficient quality in both subcategories of 'overall content validity'; 3/100 received a score of sufficient quality in both subcategories of 'internal structure'; 0/100 received a score of sufficient quality in all three subcategories of 'remaining measurement properties'. The Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System (PROMIS) Pediatric Profile-25 was the highest-scoring PROM identified, meeting COSMIN standards for 2/3 measurement property categories (and 5/7 subcategories). Eleven additional PROMs were identified which had sufficient scores in 1/3 measurement property categories (and 5/7 subcategories). CONCLUSION:The study identified several PROMs from the pediatric ophthalmology and pediatric oncology literature that could be relevant to the retinoblastoma population, but many have limits to their validation. Future development of a retinoblastoma-specific PROM, performed in partnership with retinoblastoma patients to support optimal content validity, could first focus on the selection and definition of the optimal construct to measure, followed potentially by adaptation and further validation of the relevant PROMs with strong methodologic quality identified in this study.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.DesignSystematic review.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWhich PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.Results1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.ConclusionsClinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability.Prospero registration numberCRD42018086737.

Project description:BackgroundWith the rise of digital health technologies and telemedicine, the need for evidence-based evaluation is growing. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are recommended as an essential part of the evaluation of telemedicine. For the first time, a systematic review has been conducted to investigate the use of PROMs and PREMs in the evaluation studies of telemedicine covering all application types and medical purposes.ObjectiveThis study investigates the following research questions: in which scenarios are PROMs and PREMs collected for evaluation purposes, which PROM and PREM outcome domains have been covered and how often, which outcome measurement instruments have been used and how often, does the selection and quantity of PROMs and PREMs differ between study types and application types, and has the use of PROMs and PREMs changed over time.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases and included studies published from inception until April 2, 2020. We included studies evaluating telemedicine with patients as the main users; these studies reported PROMs and PREMs within randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, noncontrolled trials, and feasibility trials in English and German.ResultsOf the identified 2671 studies, 303 (11.34%) were included; of the 303 studies, 67 (22.1%) were feasibility studies, 70 (23.1%) were noncontrolled trials, 20 (6.6%) were controlled trials, and 146 (48.2%) were randomized controlled trials. Health-related quality of life (n=310; mean 1.02, SD 1.05), emotional function (n=244; mean 0.81, SD 1.18), and adherence (n=103; mean 0.34, SD 0.53) were the most frequently assessed outcome domains. Self-developed PROMs were used in 21.4% (65/303) of the studies, and self-developed PREMs were used in 22.3% (68/303). PROMs (n=884) were assessed more frequently than PREMs (n=234). As the evidence level of the studies increased, the number of PROMs also increased (τ=-0.45), and the number of PREMs decreased (τ=0.35). Since 2000, not only has the number of studies using PROMs and PREMs increased, but the level of evidence and the number of outcome measurement instruments used have also increased, with the number of PREMs permanently remaining at a lower level.ConclusionsThere have been increasingly more studies, particularly high-evidence studies, which use PROMs and PREMs to evaluate telemedicine. PROMs have been used more frequently than PREMs. With the increasing maturity stage of telemedicine applications and higher evidence level, the use of PROMs increased in line with the recommendations of evaluation guidelines. Health-related quality of life and emotional function were measured in almost all the studies. Simultaneously, health literacy as a precondition for using the application adequately, alongside proper training and guidance, has rarely been reported. Further efforts should be pursued to standardize PROM and PREM collection in evaluation studies of telemedicine.

Project description:BACKGROUND:There is significant promise in analyzing physician patient-sharing networks to indirectly measure care coordination, yet it is unknown whether these measures reflect patients' perceptions of care coordination. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the associations between network-based measures of care coordination and patient-reported experience measures. DESIGN:We analyzed patient-sharing physician networks within group practices using data made available by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. SUBJECTS:Medicare beneficiaries who provided responses to the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey in 2016 (data aggregated by physician group practice made available through the Physician Compare 2016 Group Public Reporting). MAIN MEASURES:The outcomes of interest were patient-reported experience measures reflecting aspects of care coordination (CAHPS). The predictor variables of interests were physician group practice density (the number of physician pairs who share patients adjusting for the total number of physician pairs) and clustering (the extent to which sets of three physicians share patients). KEY RESULTS:Four hundred seventy-six groups had patient-reported measures available. Patients' perception of "Clinicians working together for your care" was significantly positively associated with both physician group practice density (Est (95?%?CI)?=?5.07(0.83,?9.33),?p?=?0.02) and clustering (Est (95?%?CI)?=?3.73(1.01,?6.44),?p?=?0.007). Physician group practice clustering was also significantly positively associated with "Getting timely care, appointments, and information" (Est (95?%?CI)?=?4.63(0.21,?9.06), p?=?0.04). CONCLUSIONS:This work suggests that network-based measures of care coordination are associated with some patient-reported experience measures. Evaluating and intervening on patient-sharing networks may provide novel strategies for initiatives aimed at improving quality of care and the patient experience.