A Technological Tool Aimed at Self-Care in Patients With Multimorbidity: Cross-Sectional Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have been positioned as useful tools to facilitate self-care. The interaction between a patient and technology, known as usability, is particularly important for achieving positive health outcomes. Specific characteristics of patients with chronic diseases, including multimorbidity, can affect their interaction with different technologies. Thus, studying the usability of ICTs in the field of multimorbidity has become a key element to ensure their relevant role in promoting self-care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the usability of a technological tool dedicated to health and self-care in patients with multimorbidity in primary care. METHODS: A descriptive observational cross-sectional usability study was performed framed in the clinical trial in the primary care health centers of Madrid Health Service of the TeNDER (Affective Based Integrated Care for Better Quality of Life) project. The TeNDER technological tool integrates sensors for monitoring physical and sleep activity along with a mobile app for consulting the data collected and working with self-management tools. This project included patients over 60 years of age who had one or more chronic diseases, at least one of which was mild-moderate cognitive impairment, Parkinson disease, or cardiovascular disease. From the 250 patients included in the project, 38 agreed to participate in the usability study. The usability variables investigated were effectiveness, which was determined by the degree of completion and the total number of errors per task; efficiency, evaluated as the average time to perform each task; and satisfaction, quantified by the System Usability Scale. Five tasks were evaluated based on real case scenarios. Usability variables were analyzed according to the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients. A logistic regression model was constructed to estimate the factors associated with the type of support provided for task completion. RESULTS: The median age of the 38 participants was 75 (IQR 72.0-79.0) years. There was a slight majority of women (20/38, 52.6%) and the participants had a median of 8 (IQR 7.0-11.0) chronic diseases. Thirty patients completed the usability study, with a usability effectiveness result of 89.3% (134/150 tasks completed). Among the 30 patients, 66.7% (n=20) completed all tasks and 56.7% (17/30) required personalized help on at least one task. In the multivariate analysis, educational level emerged as a facilitating factor for independent task completion (odds ratio 1.79, 95% CI 0.47-6.83). The median time to complete the total tasks was 296 seconds (IQR 210.0-397.0) and the median satisfaction score was 55 (IQR 45.0-62.5) out of 100. CONCLUSIONS: Although usability effectiveness was high, the poor efficiency and usability satisfaction scores suggest that there are other factors that may interfere with the results. Multimorbidity was not confirmed to be a key factor affecting the usability of the technological tool. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05681065; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05681065.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".