Design and Usability Evaluation of Mobile Voice-Added Food Reporting for Elderly People: Randomized Controlled Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Advances in voice technology have raised new possibilities for apps related to daily health maintenance. However, the usability of such technologies for older users remains unclear and requires further investigation. OBJECTIVE: We designed and evaluated two innovative mobile voice-added apps for food intake reporting, namely voice-only reporting (VOR) and voice-button reporting (VBR). Each app features a unique interactive procedure for reporting food intake. With VOR, users verbally report the main contents of each dish, while VBR provides both voice and existing touch screen inputs for food intake reporting. The relative usability of the two apps was assessed through the metrics of accuracy, efficiency, and user perception. METHODS: The two mobile apps were compared in a head-to-head parallel randomized trial evaluation. A group of 57 adults aged 60-90 years (12 male and 45 female participants) was recruited from a retirement community and randomized into two experimental groups, that is, VOR (n=30) and VBR (n=27) groups. Both groups were tested using the same set of 17 food items including dishes and beverages selected and allocated to present distinct breakfast, lunch, and dinner meals. All participants used a 7-inch tablet computer for the test. The resulting data were analyzed to evaluate reporting accuracy and time efficiency, and the system usability scale (SUS) was used to measure user perception. RESULTS: For eight error types identified in the experiment, the VBR group participants were significantly (P<.001) more error prone owing to the required use of button-tapping actions. The highest error rates in the VOR group were related to incomprehensible reporting speech (28/420, 6.7%), while the highest error rates in the VBR group were related to failure to make required button taps (39/378, 10.3%). The VOR group required significantly (P<.001) less time to complete food reporting. The overall subjective reactions of the two groups based on the SUS surpassed the benchmark and were not significantly different (P=.20). CONCLUSIONS: Experimental results showed that VOR outperformed VBR, suggesting that voice-only food input reporting is preferable for elderly users. Voice-added apps offer a potential mechanism for the self-management of dietary intake by elderly users. Our study contributes an evidence-based evaluation of prototype design and selection under a user-centered design model. The results provide a useful reference for selecting optimal user interaction design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Registry ISRCTN17335889; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17335889.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».