A User-Centered Design Approach for a Screening App for People With Cognitive Impairment (digiDEM-SCREEN): Development and Usability Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Dementia is a widespread syndrome that currently affects more than 55 million people worldwide. Digital screening instruments are one way to increase diagnosis rates. Developing an app for older adults presents several challenges, both technical and social. In order to make the app user-friendly, feedback from potential future end users is crucial during this development process. Objective: This study aimed to establish a user-centered design process for the development of digiDEM-SCREEN, a user-friendly app to support early identification of persons with slight symptoms of dementia. Methods: This research used qualitative and quantitative methods and involved 3 key stakeholder groups: the digiDEM research team, the software development team, and the target user group (older adults ≥65 years with and without cognitive impairments). The development of the screening app was based on an already existing and scientifically analyzed screening test (Self-Administered Tasks Uncovering Risk of Neurodegeneration; SATURN). An initial prototype was developed based on the recommendations for mobile health apps and the teams' experiences. The prototype was tested in several iterations by various end users and continuously improved. The app's usability was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS), and verbal feedback by the end users was obtained using the think-aloud method. Results: The translation process during test development took linguistic and cultural aspects into account. The texts were also adapted to the German-speaking context. Additional instructions were developed and supplemented. The test was administered using different randomization options to minimize learning effects. digiDEM-SCREEN was developed as a tablet and smartphone app. In the first focus group discussion, the developers identified and corrected the most significant criticism in the next version. Based on the iterative improvement process, only minor issues needed to be addressed after the final focus group discussion. The SUS score increased with each version (score of 72.5 for V1 vs 82.4 for V2), while the verbal feedback from end users also improved. Conclusions: The development of digiDEM-SCREEN serves as an excellent example of the importance of involving experts and potential end users in the design and development process of health apps. Close collaboration with end users leads to products that not only meet current standards but also address the actual needs and expectations of users. This is also a crucial step toward promoting broader adoption of such digital tools. This research highlights the significance of a user-centered design approach, allowing content, text, and design to be optimally tailored to the needs of the target audience. From these findings, it can be concluded that future projects in the field of health apps would also benefit from a similar approach.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 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 ».