Attributes, Methods, and Frameworks Used to Evaluate Wearables and Their Companion mHealth Apps: Scoping Review
- PMID: 38578671
- PMCID: PMC11031706
- DOI: 10.2196/52179
Attributes, Methods, and Frameworks Used to Evaluate Wearables and Their Companion mHealth Apps: Scoping Review
Abstract
Background: Wearable devices, mobile technologies, and their combination have been accepted into clinical use to better assess the physical fitness and quality of life of patients and as preventive measures. Usability is pivotal for overcoming constraints and gaining users' acceptance of technology such as wearables and their companion mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, owing to limitations in design and evaluation, interactive wearables and mHealth apps have often been restricted from their full potential.
Objective: This study aims to identify studies that have incorporated wearable devices and determine their frequency of use in conjunction with mHealth apps or their combination. Specifically, this study aims to understand the attributes and evaluation techniques used to evaluate usability in the health care domain for these technologies and their combinations.
Methods: We conducted an extensive search across 4 electronic databases, spanning the last 30 years up to December 2021. Studies including the keywords "wearable devices," "mobile apps," "mHealth apps," "physiological data," "usability," "user experience," and "user evaluation" were considered for inclusion. A team of 5 reviewers screened the collected publications and charted the features based on the research questions. Subsequently, we categorized these characteristics following existing usability and wearable taxonomies. We applied a methodological framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist.
Results: A total of 382 reports were identified from the search strategy, and 68 articles were included. Most of the studies (57/68, 84%) involved the simultaneous use of wearables and connected mobile apps. Wrist-worn commercial consumer devices such as wristbands were the most prevalent, accounting for 66% (45/68) of the wearables identified in our review. Approximately half of the data from the medical domain (32/68, 47%) focused on studies involving participants with chronic illnesses or disorders. Overall, 29 usability attributes were identified, and 5 attributes were frequently used for evaluation: satisfaction (34/68, 50%), ease of use (27/68, 40%), user experience (16/68, 24%), perceived usefulness (18/68, 26%), and effectiveness (15/68, 22%). Only 10% (7/68) of the studies used a user- or human-centered design paradigm for usability evaluation.
Conclusions: Our scoping review identified the types and categories of wearable devices and mHealth apps, their frequency of use in studies, and their implementation in the medical context. In addition, we examined the usability evaluation of these technologies: methods, attributes, and frameworks. Within the array of available wearables and mHealth apps, health care providers encounter the challenge of selecting devices and companion apps that are effective, user-friendly, and compatible with user interactions. The current gap in usability and user experience in health care research limits our understanding of the strengths and limitations of wearable technologies and their companion apps. Additional research is necessary to overcome these limitations.
Keywords: evaluation frameworks; health care; mHealth; mobile health; mobile phone; usability attributes; usability methods; wearables.
©Preetha Moorthy, Lina Weinert, Christina Schüttler, Laura Svensson, Brita Sedlmayr, Julia Müller, Till Nagel. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 05.04.2024.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review.J Med Internet Res. 2023 May 12;25:e43808. doi: 10.2196/43808. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37171838 Free PMC article.
-
Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review.J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jan 6;22(1):e15337. doi: 10.2196/15337. J Med Internet Res. 2020. PMID: 31904579 Free PMC article.
-
Considering User Experience and Behavioral Approaches in the Design of mHealth Interventions for Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review.J Med Internet Res. 2024 Oct 4;26:e54405. doi: 10.2196/54405. J Med Internet Res. 2024. PMID: 39365991 Free PMC article.
-
Usability Methods and Attributes Reported in Usability Studies of Mobile Apps for Health Care Education: Scoping Review.JMIR Med Educ. 2022 Jun 29;8(2):e38259. doi: 10.2196/38259. JMIR Med Educ. 2022. PMID: 35767323 Free PMC article.
-
Mobile Apps and Wearable Devices for Cardiovascular Health: Narrative Review.JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2025 Apr 4;13:e65782. doi: 10.2196/65782. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2025. PMID: 40184552 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Usability Testing of a Digitized Interventional Prehabilitation Tool for Health Care Professionals and Patients Before Major Surgeries: Formative and Summative Evaluation.JMIR Form Res. 2024 Dec 11;8:e59513. doi: 10.2196/59513. JMIR Form Res. 2024. PMID: 39661439 Free PMC article.
-
Wearables in Chronomedicine and Interpretation of Circadian Health.Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Jan 30;15(3):327. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15030327. Diagnostics (Basel). 2025. PMID: 39941257 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Usage Trends and Data Sharing Practices of Healthcare Wearable Devices Among US Adults: Cross-Sectional Study.J Med Internet Res. 2025 Feb 21;27:e63879. doi: 10.2196/63879. J Med Internet Res. 2025. PMID: 39982763 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluating the Usability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring and Monitoring Activity Post-Stroke: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel). 2025 Jun 12;25(12):3694. doi: 10.3390/s25123694. Sensors (Basel). 2025. PMID: 40573581 Free PMC article.
-
Design of a Mobile App and a Clinical Trial Management System for Cognitive Health and Dementia Risk Reduction: User-Centered Design Approach.JMIR Aging. 2025 Jul 2;8:e66660. doi: 10.2196/66660. JMIR Aging. 2025. PMID: 40601924 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
References
-
- Düking P, Achtzehn S, Holmberg HC, Sperlich B. Integrated framework of load monitoring by a combination of smartphone applications, wearables and point-of-care testing provides feedback that allows individual responsive adjustments to activities of daily living. Sensors (Basel) 2018 May 19;18(5):1632. doi: 10.3390/s18051632. https://www.mdpi.com/resolver?pii=s18051632 s18051632 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Düking P, Hotho A, Holmberg HC, Fuss FK, Sperlich B. Comparison of non-invasive individual monitoring of the training and health of athletes with commercially available wearable technologies. Front Physiol. 2016 Mar 09;7:71. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2016.00071. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/27014077 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Odendaal WA, Anstey Watkins J, Leon N, Goudge J, Griffiths F, Tomlinson M, Daniels K. Health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Mar 26;3(3):CD011942. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011942.pub2. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/32216074 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Izmailova ES, Wagner JA, Perakslis ED. Wearable devices in clinical trials: hype and hypothesis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Jul 02;104(1):42–52. doi: 10.1002/cpt.966. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/29205294 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Cox SM, Lane A, Volchenboum SL. Use of wearable, mobile, and sensor technology in cancer clinical trials. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2018 Dec;2:1–11. doi: 10.1200/CCI.17.00147. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/CCI.17.00147?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id... - DOI - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous