Estimating Cognitive Load in a Mobile Personal Health Record Application: A Cognitive Task Analysis Approach.

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Healthcare Informatics Research Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-31 DOI:10.4258/hir.2023.29.4.367
Neşe Zayim, Hasibe Yıldız, Yilmaz Kemal Yüce
{"title":"Estimating Cognitive Load in a Mobile Personal Health Record Application: A Cognitive Task Analysis Approach.","authors":"Neşe Zayim, Hasibe Yıldız, Yilmaz Kemal Yüce","doi":"10.4258/hir.2023.29.4.367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Mobile health applications that are designed without considering usability criteria can lead to cognitive overload, resulting in the rejection of these apps. To avoid this problem, the user interface of mobile health applications should be evaluated for cognitive load. This evaluation can contribute to the improvement of the user interface and help prevent cognitive overload for the user.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, we evaluated a mobile personal health records application using the cognitive task analysis method, specifically the goals, operators, methods, and selection rules (GOMS) approach, along with the related updated GOMS model and gesture-level model techniques. The GOMS method allowed us to determine the steps of the tasks and categorize them as physical or cognitive tasks. We then estimated the completion times of these tasks using the updated GOMS model and gesture-level model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 10 identified tasks were split into 398 steps consisting of mental and physical operators. The time to complete all the tasks was 5.70 minutes and 5.45 minutes according to the updated GOMS model and gesture-level model, respectively. Mental operators covered 73% of the total fulfillment time of the tasks according to the updated GOMS model and 76% according to the gesture-level model. The inter-rater reliability analysis yielded an average of 0.80, indicating good reliability for the evaluation method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The majority of the task execution times comprised mental operators, suggesting that the cognitive load on users is high. To enhance the application's implementation, the number of mental operators should be reduced.</p>","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10651402/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2023.29.4.367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Mobile health applications that are designed without considering usability criteria can lead to cognitive overload, resulting in the rejection of these apps. To avoid this problem, the user interface of mobile health applications should be evaluated for cognitive load. This evaluation can contribute to the improvement of the user interface and help prevent cognitive overload for the user.

Methods: In this study, we evaluated a mobile personal health records application using the cognitive task analysis method, specifically the goals, operators, methods, and selection rules (GOMS) approach, along with the related updated GOMS model and gesture-level model techniques. The GOMS method allowed us to determine the steps of the tasks and categorize them as physical or cognitive tasks. We then estimated the completion times of these tasks using the updated GOMS model and gesture-level model.

Results: All 10 identified tasks were split into 398 steps consisting of mental and physical operators. The time to complete all the tasks was 5.70 minutes and 5.45 minutes according to the updated GOMS model and gesture-level model, respectively. Mental operators covered 73% of the total fulfillment time of the tasks according to the updated GOMS model and 76% according to the gesture-level model. The inter-rater reliability analysis yielded an average of 0.80, indicating good reliability for the evaluation method.

Conclusions: The majority of the task execution times comprised mental operators, suggesting that the cognitive load on users is high. To enhance the application's implementation, the number of mental operators should be reduced.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在移动个人健康记录应用中估计认知负荷:一种认知任务分析方法。
目标:未考虑可用性标准的移动健康应用程序的设计可能导致认知超载,从而导致这些应用程序被拒绝。为了避免这个问题,移动健康应用程序的用户界面应该评估认知负荷。这种评估有助于用户界面的改进,并有助于防止用户的认知过载。方法:在本研究中,我们使用认知任务分析方法,特别是目标、操作者、方法和选择规则(GOMS)方法,以及相关的更新GOMS模型和手势级模型技术,对移动个人健康记录应用程序进行了评估。GOMS方法允许我们确定任务的步骤,并将它们分类为体力任务或认知任务。然后,我们使用更新的GOMS模型和手势水平模型估计这些任务的完成时间。结果:所有10个确定的任务分为398个步骤,包括精神和物理操作。根据更新后的GOMS模型和手势水平模型,完成所有任务的时间分别为5.70分钟和5.45分钟。根据更新的GOMS模型,心理操作者占任务总完成时间的73%,根据手势水平模型,这一比例为76%。评价结果的信度平均值为0.80,表明评价方法具有较好的信度。结论:大多数任务执行时间包含心理操作,表明用户的认知负荷较高。为了提高应用程序的可执行性,应该减少心理操作符的数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
期刊最新文献
Status and Trends of the Digital Healthcare Industry. Technology and Access to Healthcare with Different Scheduling Systems: A Scoping Review. Associations between Nicotine Dependence, Smartphone Usage Patterns, and Expected Compliance with a Smoking Cessation Application among Smokers. ChatGPT Predicts In-Hospital All-Cause Mortality for Sepsis: In-Context Learning with the Korean Sepsis Alliance Database. Data Market-related Issues in the Medical Field: Accelerating Digital Healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1