Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Dec 2;23(12):e25012.
doi: 10.2196/25012.

Establishing a Working Definition of User Experience for eHealth Interventions of Self-reported User Experience Measures With eHealth Researchers and Adolescents: Scoping Review

Affiliations

Establishing a Working Definition of User Experience for eHealth Interventions of Self-reported User Experience Measures With eHealth Researchers and Adolescents: Scoping Review

Amanda S Newton et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Across eHealth intervention studies involving children, adolescents, and their parents, researchers have measured user experience to assist with intervention development, refinement, and evaluation. To date, no widely accepted definitions or measures of user experience exist to support a standardized approach for evaluation and comparison within or across interventions.

Objective: We conduct a scoping review with subsequent Delphi consultation to identify how user experience is defined and measured in eHealth research studies, characterize the measurement tools used, and establish working definitions for domains of user experience that could be used in future eHealth evaluations.

Methods: We systematically searched electronic databases for published and gray literature available from January 1, 2005, to April 11, 2019. We included studies assessing an eHealth intervention that targeted any health condition and was designed for use by children, adolescents, and their parents. eHealth interventions needed to be web-, computer-, or mobile-based, mediated by the internet with some degree of interactivity. We required studies to report the measurement of user experience as first-person experiences, involving cognitive and behavioral factors reported by intervention users. We appraised the quality of user experience measures in included studies using published criteria: well-established, approaching well-established, promising, or not yet established. We conducted a descriptive analysis of how user experience was defined and measured in each study. Review findings subsequently informed the survey questions used in the Delphi consultations with eHealth researchers and adolescent users for how user experience should be defined and measured.

Results: Of the 8634 articles screened for eligibility, 129 articles and 1 erratum were included in the review. A total of 30 eHealth researchers and 27 adolescents participated in the Delphi consultations. On the basis of the literature and consultations, we proposed working definitions for 6 main user experience domains: acceptability, satisfaction, credibility, usability, user-reported adherence, and perceived impact. Although most studies incorporated a study-specific measure, we identified 10 well-established measures to quantify 5 of the 6 domains of user experience (all except for self-reported adherence). Our adolescent and researcher participants ranked perceived impact as one of the most important domains of user experience and usability as one of the least important domains. Rankings between adolescents and researchers diverged for other domains.

Conclusions: Findings highlight the various ways in which user experience has been defined and measured across studies and what aspects are most valued by researchers and adolescent users. We propose incorporating the working definitions and available measures of user experience to support consistent evaluation and reporting of outcomes across studies. Future studies can refine the definitions and measurement of user experience, explore how user experience relates to other eHealth outcomes, and inform the design and use of human-centered eHealth interventions.

Keywords: Delphi; design; development; eHealth; health care; internet; scoping review; user experience.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: Although SM does not own the BRAVE Program, it is possible that at some point in the future, she may receive royalties from future commercialization of the program.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Delphi consultation process. REDCap: Research Electronic Data Capture.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Literature search flow diagram.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The type and frequency of user experience domains measured across eHealth studies over time. The domains named in this figure reflect the agreed-on terminology that resulted from the Delphi consultation with researchers.

References

    1. Zhang T, Dong H. Human-Centred Design: An Emergent Conceptual Model. London, UK: Royal College of Art; 2009. pp. 8–10.
    1. Ergonomics of human-centred system interaction. British Standards Document BS EN ISO 9241-210. 2019. [2021-11-21]. https://landingpage.bsigroup.com/LandingPage/Undated?UPI=000000000030388991 .
    1. McCurdie T, Taneva S, Casselman M, Yeung M, McDaniel C, Ho W, Cafazzo J. mHealth consumer apps: the case for user-centered design. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2012;Suppl:49–56. doi: 10.2345/0899-8205-46.s2.49. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Poole ES. HCI and mobile health interventions: how human-computer interaction can contribute to successful mobile health interventions. Transl Behav Med. 2013 Dec;3(4):402–5. doi: 10.1007/s13142-013-0214-3. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/24294328 214 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wilson E. Patient-Centered e-Health. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2009. pp. 10–25.

Publication types