title: Assessment of the Health IT Usability Evaluation Model (Health-ITUEM) for evaluating mobile health (mHealth) technology.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Over two decades of research has been conducted using mobile devices for health related behaviors yet many of these studies lack rigor. There are few evaluation frameworks for assessing the usability of mHealth, which is critical as the use of this technology proliferates. As the development of interventions using mobile technology increase, future work in this domain necessitates the use of a rigorous usability evaluation framework.
  
  
  METHODS
  We used two exemplars to assess the appropriateness of the Health IT Usability Evaluation Model (Health-ITUEM) for evaluating the usability of mHealth technology. In the first exemplar, we conducted 6 focus group sessions to explore adolescents' use of mobile technology for meeting their health Information needs. In the second exemplar, we conducted 4 focus group sessions following an Ecological Momentary Assessment study in which 60 adolescents were given a smartphone with pre-installed health-related applications (apps).
  
  
  METHODS
  We coded the focus group data using the 9 concepts of the Health-ITUEM: Error prevention, Completeness, Memorability, Information needs, Flexibility/Customizability, Learnability, Performance speed, Competency, Other outcomes. To develop a finer granularity of analysis, the nine concepts were broken into positive, negative, and neutral codes. A total of 27 codes were created. Two raters (R1 and R2) initially coded all text and a third rater (R3) reconciled coding discordance between raters R1 and R2.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 133 codes were applied to Exemplar 1. In Exemplar 2 there were a total of 286 codes applied to 195 excerpts. Performance speed, Other outcomes, and Information needs were among the most frequently occurring codes.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our two exemplars demonstrated the appropriateness and usefulness of the Health-ITUEM in evaluating mobile health technology. Further assessment of this framework with other study populations should consider whether Memorability and Error prevention are necessary to include when evaluating mHealth technology.
authors: HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies, New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University, New York, NY, United States; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.
authors: William
authors: W
authors: Brown
authors: Po-Yin
authors: PY
authors: Yen
authors: Marlene
authors: M
authors: Rojas
authors: Rebecca
authors: R
authors: Schnall
mesh_terms: D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D007255:Information Services; D017216:Telemedicine
keywords: Evaluation framework; Health-ITUEM; Mobile health; Usability
references: BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012 May 30;12:36
references: 22646848
references: Med Care. 1994 Jan;32(1):40-66
references: 8277801
references: J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun 23;8(2):e10
references: 16867965
references: JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Apr;149(4):422-6
references: 23325302
references: J Biomed Inform. 2007 Dec;40(6 Suppl):S33-9
references: 17904914
references: Telemed J E Health. 2012 Jul-Aug;18(6):484-90
references: 22676379
references: Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;107(Pt 2):1073-6
references: 15360977
references: PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001362
references: 23349621
references: Methods Inf Med. 1998 Nov;37(4-5):394-403
references: 9865037
references: Qual Health Res. 2000 May;10(3):378-95
references: 10947483
references: J Health Commun. 2012;17 Suppl 1:44-53
references: 22548598
references: Int J Med Inform. 2012 Oct;81(10):e56-62
references: 22841702
references: J Med Internet Res. 2013 Mar 06;15(3):e54
references: 23467200
references: Telemed J E Health. 2012 Jul-Aug;18(6):409-12
references: 22650351
references: IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2008 Jul;12(4):501-12
references: 18632330
references: Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2):177-81
references: 18550322
references: J Appl Behav Anal. 1979 Winter;12(4):535-43
references: 16795610
references: J Health Commun. 2012;17 Suppl 1:11-21
references: 22548594
references: J Med Internet Res. 2004 Nov 10;6(4):e40
references: 15631964
references: ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1993 Dec;16(2):1-8
references: 8311428
references: J Med Internet Res. 2006 Sep 29;8(3):e23
references: 17032639
references: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2012;2012:209-17
references: 23304290
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002 Sep-Oct;9(5):540-53
references: 12223506
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12:CD007457
references: 23235643
references: Comput Inform Nurs. 2008 Mar-Apr;26(2):69-77
references: 18317257
references: Nurs Res. 2006 Mar-Apr;55(2 Suppl):S37-42
references: 16601633
references: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2010 Nov 13;2010:917-21
references: 21347112
references: Appl Clin Inform. 2012;3(4):356-66
references: 23227134
references: Telemed J E Health. 2013 Jan;19(1):13-8
references: 23215639
references: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003;:356-60
references: 14728194