User-Centered Development of a Mobile App to Assess the Quality of Life of Patients With Cancer: Iterative Investigation and Usability Testing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The treatment for cancer can have a negative impact not only on physical well-being but also on mental health and the quality of life (QoL). Health apps enable the monitoring of different parameters, but to date, there are only few that support patients with cancer and none that focuses on the assessment of QoL. Furthermore, patients as stakeholders are often only integrated at the late stage of the development process, if at all. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this research was to develop and evaluate a smartphone app (Lion-App) to enable patients with cancer to autonomously measure the QoL with an iterative, user-centered approach. METHODS: Patients with cancer were involved in a 3-stage process from conceptualization to the point when the app was available on the tester's private device. First, focus groups with members (N=21) of cancer support groups were conducted to understand their expectations and needs. Thereafter, individual tests were performed. After developing a prototype that incorporated findings from the focus groups, a second test cycle was conducted, followed by a beta test lasting 2 months. In our app, the QoL can be assessed via a patient diary and an integrated questionnaire. Through all stages, usability was evaluated using the modular extended version of the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ+), including the calculation of a key performance indicator (KPI). If possible, the impact of sex on the results was evaluated. As part of the beta test, usage rates as well as age-dependent differences were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 21 participants took part in the initial 3 focus groups. In the subsequent usability testing (N=18), 17 (94%) participants rated their impression through the UEQ+, with a mean KPI of 2.12 (SD 0.64, range: -3 to 3). In the second usability test (N=14), the mean KPI increased to 2.28 (SD=0.49). In the beta test, the usage rate of 19 participants was evaluated, of whom 14 (74%) also answered the UEQ+ (mean KPI 1.78, SD 0.84). An influence of age on the number of questionnaire responses in Lion-App was observed, with a decrease in responses with increasing age (P=.02). Sex-dependent analyses were only possible for the first usability test and the beta test. The main adjustments based on user feedback were a restructuring of the diary as well as integration of a shorter questionnaire to assess the QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The iterative, user-centered approach for development and usability testing resulted in positive evaluations of Lion-App. Our app was rated as suitable for everyday use to monitor the QoL of patients with cancer. Initial results indicated that the sex and age of participants seem to play only a minor role.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».