The Experts below are selected from a list of 28089 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Peter P Groenewegen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
development and validation of measurement tools for User Experience Evaluation surveys in the public primary healthcare facilities in greece a mixed methods study
BMC Family Practice, 2019Co-Authors: Daphne Kaitelidou, D. De ,boer, Charalambos Economou, Petros Galanis, Olympia Konstantakopoulou, Olga Siskou, Silviu Domente, Wienke G W Boerma, Peter P GroenewegenAbstract:The public primary healthcare system in Greece has not been fully developed and is delivered by urban and rural health centers, outpatient departments in public hospitals and the recently established first-contact and decentralized local primary care units. The aim of this study was to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool for conducting periodic User Experience Evaluation surveys in public Primary HealthCare facilities in Greece such as outpatient clinics of public hospitals and health centers. A mixed methods approach was applied. In particular, the methodology of developing and validating the tools included three steps: (a) establishment of the theoretical background/literature review, (b) qualitative study: development of the tools items and establishment of the face validity and (c) quantitative study: pilot testing and establishment of the structural validity and estimation of the internal consistency of the tools. Two patient focus groups participated in qualitative study: one visiting health centres and the other visiting the outpatient clinics of public hospitals. Quantitative study included 733 Primary Health Care services’ Users/patients and was conducted during August–October 2017. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed to check for structural validity of the tools, while Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were estimated to check for reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed almost perfectly the presumed theoretical model and the following six factors were identified through the tools: (a) accessibility (three items, e.g. opening hours), (b) continuity and coordination of care (three items, e.g. doctor asks for medical history), (c) comprehensiveness of care (three items, e.g. doctor provides advices for healthy life), (d) quality of medical care (four items, e.g. sufficient examination time), (e) facility (four items, e.g. comfortable waiting room) and (f) quality of care provided by nurses and other health professionals (four items, e.g. polite nurses). We have developed reliable and valid tools to measure Users’ Experiences in public Primary HealthCare facilities in Greece. These tools could be very useful in examining differences between different types of public Primary Health Care facilities and different populations.
Sakib Jalil - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
complementing a clinical trial with human computer interaction patients User Experience with telehealth
JMIR human factors, 2017Co-Authors: Sakib Jalil, Trina Myers, Ian Atkinson, Muriel SodenAbstract:Background : The use of telehealth to monitor patients from home is on the rise. Telehealth technology is evaluated in a clinical trial with measures of health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. However, what happens between a technology and the patients is not investigated during a clinical trial—the telehealth technology remains as a “black box.” Meanwhile, three decades of research in the discipline of human-computer interaction (HCI) presents design, implementation, and Evaluation of technologies with a primary emphasis on Users. HCI research has exposed the importance of User Experience (UX) as an essential part of technology development and Evaluation. Objective : This research investigates the UX of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with a telehealth in-home monitoring device to manage T2D from home. We investigate how the UX during a clinical trial can be researched and what a clinical trial can learn from HCI research. Methods : We adopted an ethnographic philosophy and conducted a contextual inquiry due to time limitations followed by semistructured interviews of 9 T2D patients. We defined the method as Clinical User-Experience Evaluation (CUE). The patients were enrolled in a telehealth clinical trial of T2D; however, this research was an independent study conducted by information technologists and health researchers for a User-centered Evaluation of telehealth. Results : Key analytical findings were that patients valued the benefits of in-home monitoring, but the current device did not possess all functionalities that patients wanted. The results include patients’ Experiences and emotions while using the device, patients’ perceived benefits of the device, and how patients domesticated the device. Further analysis showed the influence of the device on patients’ awareness, family involvement, and design implications for telehealth for T2D. Conclusions : HCI could complement telehealth clinical trials and uncover knowledge about T2D patients’ UX and future design implications. Through HCI we can look into the “black box” phenomenon of clinical trials and create patient-centered telehealth solutions.
-
a meta synthesis of behavioral outcomes from telemedicine clinical trials for type 2 diabetes and the clinical User Experience Evaluation cue
Journal of Medical Systems, 2015Co-Authors: Sakib Jalil, Trina Myers, Ian AtkinsonAbstract:A worldwide demographic shift is in progress and the aged population proportion is projected to more than double across the next four decades. Our current healthcare models may not be adequate to handle this shift in demography, which may have serious consequences for the ageing population who are more prone to chronic diseases. One proposed remediation is to provide in-home assisted healthcare with technology-intervened approaches. Telemedicine, telehealth, e-health are paradigms found in scientific literature that provide clinical treatment through a technology intervention. In evidence-based medical science, these technology interventions are evaluated through clinical trials, which are targeted to measure improvements in medical conditions and the treatment's cost effectiveness. However, effectiveness of a technology also depends on the interaction pattern between the technology and its' Users, especially the patients. This paper presents (1) a meta-synthesis of clinical trials for technology-intervened treatments of type 2 diabetes and (2) the Clinical User-Experience Evaluation (CUE). CUE is a recommendation for future telemedicine clinical trials that focuses on the patient as the User from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) perspective and was developed as part of this research. The clinical trials reviewed were interpreted from a technology perspective and the non-medical or non-biological improvements of the Users (patients) rather than the medical outcome. Results show that technology-intervened treatments provide positive behavior changes among patients and are potentially highly beneficial for chronic illness management such as type 2 diabetes. The results from the CUE method show how it complements clinical trials to capture patients' interaction with a technology.
Ian Atkinson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
complementing a clinical trial with human computer interaction patients User Experience with telehealth
JMIR human factors, 2017Co-Authors: Sakib Jalil, Trina Myers, Ian Atkinson, Muriel SodenAbstract:Background : The use of telehealth to monitor patients from home is on the rise. Telehealth technology is evaluated in a clinical trial with measures of health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. However, what happens between a technology and the patients is not investigated during a clinical trial—the telehealth technology remains as a “black box.” Meanwhile, three decades of research in the discipline of human-computer interaction (HCI) presents design, implementation, and Evaluation of technologies with a primary emphasis on Users. HCI research has exposed the importance of User Experience (UX) as an essential part of technology development and Evaluation. Objective : This research investigates the UX of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with a telehealth in-home monitoring device to manage T2D from home. We investigate how the UX during a clinical trial can be researched and what a clinical trial can learn from HCI research. Methods : We adopted an ethnographic philosophy and conducted a contextual inquiry due to time limitations followed by semistructured interviews of 9 T2D patients. We defined the method as Clinical User-Experience Evaluation (CUE). The patients were enrolled in a telehealth clinical trial of T2D; however, this research was an independent study conducted by information technologists and health researchers for a User-centered Evaluation of telehealth. Results : Key analytical findings were that patients valued the benefits of in-home monitoring, but the current device did not possess all functionalities that patients wanted. The results include patients’ Experiences and emotions while using the device, patients’ perceived benefits of the device, and how patients domesticated the device. Further analysis showed the influence of the device on patients’ awareness, family involvement, and design implications for telehealth for T2D. Conclusions : HCI could complement telehealth clinical trials and uncover knowledge about T2D patients’ UX and future design implications. Through HCI we can look into the “black box” phenomenon of clinical trials and create patient-centered telehealth solutions.
-
a meta synthesis of behavioral outcomes from telemedicine clinical trials for type 2 diabetes and the clinical User Experience Evaluation cue
Journal of Medical Systems, 2015Co-Authors: Sakib Jalil, Trina Myers, Ian AtkinsonAbstract:A worldwide demographic shift is in progress and the aged population proportion is projected to more than double across the next four decades. Our current healthcare models may not be adequate to handle this shift in demography, which may have serious consequences for the ageing population who are more prone to chronic diseases. One proposed remediation is to provide in-home assisted healthcare with technology-intervened approaches. Telemedicine, telehealth, e-health are paradigms found in scientific literature that provide clinical treatment through a technology intervention. In evidence-based medical science, these technology interventions are evaluated through clinical trials, which are targeted to measure improvements in medical conditions and the treatment's cost effectiveness. However, effectiveness of a technology also depends on the interaction pattern between the technology and its' Users, especially the patients. This paper presents (1) a meta-synthesis of clinical trials for technology-intervened treatments of type 2 diabetes and (2) the Clinical User-Experience Evaluation (CUE). CUE is a recommendation for future telemedicine clinical trials that focuses on the patient as the User from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) perspective and was developed as part of this research. The clinical trials reviewed were interpreted from a technology perspective and the non-medical or non-biological improvements of the Users (patients) rather than the medical outcome. Results show that technology-intervened treatments provide positive behavior changes among patients and are potentially highly beneficial for chronic illness management such as type 2 diabetes. The results from the CUE method show how it complements clinical trials to capture patients' interaction with a technology.
Virpi Roto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
User Experience Evaluation which method to choose
International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 2011Co-Authors: Virpi Roto, Arnold P. O. S. Vermeeren, Kaisa Vaananenvainiomattila, Effie Laichong LawAbstract:User Experience has many dimensions and therefore, it is tricky to evaluate it. When the goal of User Experience Evaluation is to investigate how people feel about using an interactive system, the traditional usability methods are hardly applicable. In this tutorial, we introduce a set of 78 User Experience Evaluation methods that we have been collecting from the User Experience community 2008-2010. We give both an overview of the different types of methods and examine a selected set of methods in detail.
-
mobile questionnaires for User Experience Evaluation
Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2010Co-Authors: Heli Vaataja, Virpi RotoAbstract:As User Experience studies move from laboratories to mobile context, we need tools for collecting data in natural settings. Based on the results from a pilot study, we present early guidelines for designing mobile questionnaires to be filled in on handheld, palm-sized mobile devices. We found that special attention needs to be paid to the clarity and simplicity of the structure, layout and questionnaire content, including questions, visual icons, items and scales. In addition to the requirements set by the screen size, also data entry method, interaction style and mobile context related issues need to be taken into account when designing questionnaires for mobile devices.
-
User Experience Evaluation methods: current state and development needs
Proceedings of NordiCHI, 2010Co-Authors: Arnold P. O. S. Vermeeren, Jettie Hoonhout, Elc Law, Virpi Roto, Marianna Obrist, Kaisa Vaananen Vainio MattilaAbstract:The recent shift of emphasis to User Experience (UX) has rendered it a central focus of product design and Evaluation. A multitude of methods for UX design and Evaluation exist, but a clear overview of the current state of the available UX Evaluation methods is missing. This is partly due to a lack of agreement on the essential characteristics of UX. In this paper, we present the results of our multi-year effort of collecting UX Evaluation methods from academia and industry with different approaches such as literature review, workshops, Special Interest Groups sessions and an online survey. We have collected 96 methods and analyzed them, among other criteria, based on the product development phase and the studied period of Experience. Our analysis reveals development needs for UX Evaluation methods, such as early-stage methods, methods for social and collaborative UX Evaluation, establishing practicability and scientific quality, and a deeper understanding of UX. © 2010 ACM.
-
developing practical tools for User Experience Evaluation a case from mobile news journalism
European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, 2009Co-Authors: Heli Vaataja, Tiina Koponen, Virpi RotoAbstract:We present a questionnaire called Attrak-Work to support the Evaluation of User Experience of mobile systems in the context of mobile news journalism. We discuss theoretical background of the questionnaire and describe the development process including the field study within which the questionnaire was developed. The presented questionnaire assesses User's perception of the pragmatic (usability and task and goal achievement) and hedonic (stimulation and identification) qualities and an overall judgment of appeal. We used the questionnaire as part of a field study to corroborate and expand the findings of observations and interviews. We found the Attrak-Work questionnaire a useful tool to be used in this manner especially for the Evaluation of the hedonic qualities.
-
User Experience Evaluation methods in product development uxem 09
International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 2009Co-Authors: Virpi Roto, Kaisa Vaananenvainiomattila, Effie Laichong Law, Arnold P. O. S. VermeerenAbstract:High quality User Experience (UX) has become a central competitive factor of product development in mature consumer markets [1]. Although the term UX originated from industry and is a widely used term also in academia, the tools for managing UX in product development are still inadequate. A prerequisite for designing delightful UX in an industrial setting is to understand both the requirements tied to the pragmatic level of functionality and interaction and the requirements pertaining to the hedonic level of personal human needs, which motivate product use [2]. Understanding these requirements helps managers set UX targets for product development. The next phase in a good User-centered design process is to iteratively design and evaluate prototypes [3]. Evaluation is critical for systematically improving UX. In many approaches to UX, Evaluation basically needs to be postponed until the product is fully or at least almost fully functional. However, in an industrial setting, it is very expensive to find the UX failures only at this phase of product development. Thus, product development managers and developers have a strong need to conduct UX Evaluation as early as possible, well before all the parts affecting the holistic Experience are available. Different types of products require Evaluation on different granularity and maturity levels of a prototype. For example, due to its multi-User characteristic, a community service or an enterprise resource planning system requires a broader scope of UX Evaluation than a microwave oven or a word processor that is meant for a single User at a time. Before systematic UX Evaluation can be taken into practice, practical, lightweight UX Evaluation methods suitable for different types of products and different phases of product readiness are needed. A considerable amount of UX research is still about the conceptual frameworks and models for User Experience [4]. Besides, applying existing usability Evaluation methods (UEMs) without adaptation to evaluate UX may lead to some scoping issues. Consequently, there is a strong need to put UX Evaluation from research into practice.
Daphne Kaitelidou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
development and validation of measurement tools for User Experience Evaluation surveys in the public primary healthcare facilities in greece a mixed methods study
BMC Family Practice, 2019Co-Authors: Daphne Kaitelidou, D. De ,boer, Charalambos Economou, Petros Galanis, Olympia Konstantakopoulou, Olga Siskou, Silviu Domente, Wienke G W Boerma, Peter P GroenewegenAbstract:The public primary healthcare system in Greece has not been fully developed and is delivered by urban and rural health centers, outpatient departments in public hospitals and the recently established first-contact and decentralized local primary care units. The aim of this study was to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool for conducting periodic User Experience Evaluation surveys in public Primary HealthCare facilities in Greece such as outpatient clinics of public hospitals and health centers. A mixed methods approach was applied. In particular, the methodology of developing and validating the tools included three steps: (a) establishment of the theoretical background/literature review, (b) qualitative study: development of the tools items and establishment of the face validity and (c) quantitative study: pilot testing and establishment of the structural validity and estimation of the internal consistency of the tools. Two patient focus groups participated in qualitative study: one visiting health centres and the other visiting the outpatient clinics of public hospitals. Quantitative study included 733 Primary Health Care services’ Users/patients and was conducted during August–October 2017. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed to check for structural validity of the tools, while Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were estimated to check for reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed almost perfectly the presumed theoretical model and the following six factors were identified through the tools: (a) accessibility (three items, e.g. opening hours), (b) continuity and coordination of care (three items, e.g. doctor asks for medical history), (c) comprehensiveness of care (three items, e.g. doctor provides advices for healthy life), (d) quality of medical care (four items, e.g. sufficient examination time), (e) facility (four items, e.g. comfortable waiting room) and (f) quality of care provided by nurses and other health professionals (four items, e.g. polite nurses). We have developed reliable and valid tools to measure Users’ Experiences in public Primary HealthCare facilities in Greece. These tools could be very useful in examining differences between different types of public Primary Health Care facilities and different populations.
