Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review

BackgroundMany mobile health (mHealth) apps for mental health have been made available in recent years. Although there is reason to be optimistic about their effect on improving health and increasing access to care, there is a call for more knowledge concerning how mHealth ap...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Inal, Yavuz, Wake, Jo Dugstad, Guribye, Frode, Nordgreen, Tine
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2020-01-01
Series:Journal of Medical Internet Research
Online Access:https://www.jmir.org/2020/1/e15337
id doaj-8473df2e6ccb42a1820ed739d6593ca4
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8473df2e6ccb42a1820ed739d6593ca42021-04-02T19:21:00ZengJMIR PublicationsJournal of Medical Internet Research1438-88712020-01-01221e1533710.2196/15337Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic ReviewInal, YavuzWake, Jo DugstadGuribye, FrodeNordgreen, Tine BackgroundMany mobile health (mHealth) apps for mental health have been made available in recent years. Although there is reason to be optimistic about their effect on improving health and increasing access to care, there is a call for more knowledge concerning how mHealth apps are used in practice. ObjectiveThis study aimed to review the literature on how usability is being addressed and measured in mHealth interventions for mental health problems. MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review through a search for peer-reviewed studies published between 2001 and 2018 in the following electronic databases: EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently assessed all abstracts against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. ResultsA total of 299 studies were initially identified based on the inclusion keywords. Following a review of the title, abstract, and full text, 42 studies were found that fulfilled the criteria, most of which evaluated usability with patients (n=29) and health care providers (n=11) as opposed to healthy users (n=8) and were directed at a wide variety of mental health problems (n=24). Half of the studies set out to evaluate usability (n=21), and the remainder focused on feasibility (n=10) or acceptability (n=10). Regarding the maturity of the evaluated systems, most were either prototypes or previously tested versions of the technology, and the studies included few accounts of sketching and participatory design processes. The most common reason referred to for developing mobile mental health apps was the availability of mobile devices to users, their popularity, and how people in general became accustomed to using them for various purposes. ConclusionsThis study provides a detailed account of how evidence of usability of mHealth apps is gathered in the form of usability evaluations from the perspective of computer science and human-computer interaction, including how users feature in the evaluation, how the study objectives and outcomes are stated, which research methods and techniques are used, and what the notion of mobility features is for mHealth apps. Most studies described their methods as trials, gathered data from a small sample size, and carried out a summative evaluation using a single questionnaire, which indicates that usability evaluation was not the main focus. As many studies described using an adapted version of a standard usability questionnaire, there may be a need for developing a standardized mHealth usability questionnaire.https://www.jmir.org/2020/1/e15337
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Inal, Yavuz
Wake, Jo Dugstad
Guribye, Frode
Nordgreen, Tine
spellingShingle Inal, Yavuz
Wake, Jo Dugstad
Guribye, Frode
Nordgreen, Tine
Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
Journal of Medical Internet Research
author_facet Inal, Yavuz
Wake, Jo Dugstad
Guribye, Frode
Nordgreen, Tine
author_sort Inal, Yavuz
title Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
title_short Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
title_full Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
title_fullStr Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Usability Evaluations of Mobile Mental Health Technologies: Systematic Review
title_sort usability evaluations of mobile mental health technologies: systematic review
publisher JMIR Publications
series Journal of Medical Internet Research
issn 1438-8871
publishDate 2020-01-01
description BackgroundMany mobile health (mHealth) apps for mental health have been made available in recent years. Although there is reason to be optimistic about their effect on improving health and increasing access to care, there is a call for more knowledge concerning how mHealth apps are used in practice. ObjectiveThis study aimed to review the literature on how usability is being addressed and measured in mHealth interventions for mental health problems. MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review through a search for peer-reviewed studies published between 2001 and 2018 in the following electronic databases: EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently assessed all abstracts against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. ResultsA total of 299 studies were initially identified based on the inclusion keywords. Following a review of the title, abstract, and full text, 42 studies were found that fulfilled the criteria, most of which evaluated usability with patients (n=29) and health care providers (n=11) as opposed to healthy users (n=8) and were directed at a wide variety of mental health problems (n=24). Half of the studies set out to evaluate usability (n=21), and the remainder focused on feasibility (n=10) or acceptability (n=10). Regarding the maturity of the evaluated systems, most were either prototypes or previously tested versions of the technology, and the studies included few accounts of sketching and participatory design processes. The most common reason referred to for developing mobile mental health apps was the availability of mobile devices to users, their popularity, and how people in general became accustomed to using them for various purposes. ConclusionsThis study provides a detailed account of how evidence of usability of mHealth apps is gathered in the form of usability evaluations from the perspective of computer science and human-computer interaction, including how users feature in the evaluation, how the study objectives and outcomes are stated, which research methods and techniques are used, and what the notion of mobility features is for mHealth apps. Most studies described their methods as trials, gathered data from a small sample size, and carried out a summative evaluation using a single questionnaire, which indicates that usability evaluation was not the main focus. As many studies described using an adapted version of a standard usability questionnaire, there may be a need for developing a standardized mHealth usability questionnaire.
url https://www.jmir.org/2020/1/e15337
work_keys_str_mv AT inalyavuz usabilityevaluationsofmobilementalhealthtechnologiessystematicreview
AT wakejodugstad usabilityevaluationsofmobilementalhealthtechnologiessystematicreview
AT guribyefrode usabilityevaluationsofmobilementalhealthtechnologiessystematicreview
AT nordgreentine usabilityevaluationsofmobilementalhealthtechnologiessystematicreview
_version_ 1721549058331377664