MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132575552 · doi:10.2196/25604

Usability of a Fall Risk mHealth App for People With Multiple Sclerosis: Mixed Methods Study

2021· article· en· W3132575552 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katherine L. Hsieh, Jason Fanning, Mikaela L. Frechette, Jacob J. Sosnoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilitymHealthQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineFall preventionApplied psychologyPhysical therapyPsychologyPoison controlComputer scienceHuman factors and ergonomicsMedical emergencyPsychological interventionNursingHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, neurodegenerative disease that causes a range of motor, sensory, and cognitive symptoms. Due to these symptoms, people with MS are at a high risk for falls, fall-related injuries, and reductions in quality of life. There is no cure for MS, and managing symptoms and disease progression is important to maintain a high quality of life. Mobile health (mHealth) apps are commonly used by people with MS to help manage their health. However, there are limited health apps for people with MS designed to evaluate fall risk. A fall risk app can increase access to fall risk assessments and improve self-management. When designing mHealth apps, a user-centered approach is critical for improving use and adoption. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to undergo a user-centered approach to test and refine the usability of the app through an iterative design process. METHODS: The fall risk app Steady-MS is an extension of Steady, a fall risk app for older adults. Steady-MS consists of 2 components: a 25-item questionnaire about demographics and MS symptoms and 5 standing balance tasks. Data from the questionnaire and balance tasks were inputted into an algorithm to compute a fall risk score. Two iterations of semistructured interviews (n=5 participants per iteration) were performed to evaluate usability. People with MS used Steady-MS on a smartphone, thinking out loud. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and developed into codes and themes. People with MS also completed the System Usability Scale. RESULTS: A total of 3 themes were identified: intuitive navigation, efficiency of use, and perceived value. Overall, the participants found Steady-MS efficient to use and useful to learn their fall risk score. There were challenges related to cognitive overload during the balance tasks. Modifications were made, and after the second iteration, people with MS reported that the app was intuitive and efficient. Average System Usability Scale scores were 95.5 in both iterations, representing excellent usability. CONCLUSIONS: Steady-MS is the first mHealth app for people with MS to assess their overall risk of falling and is usable by a subset of people with MS. People with MS found Steady-MS to be usable and useful for understanding their risk of falling. When developing future mHealth apps for people with MS, it is important to prevent cognitive overload through simple and clear instructions and present scores that are understood and interpreted correctly through visuals and text. These findings underscore the importance of user-centered design and provide a foundation for the future development of tools to assess and prevent scalable falls for people with MS. Future steps include understanding the validity of the fall risk algorithm and evaluating the clinical utility of the app.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207