绘制全球健康干预措施中的交互设计图:COVID-19 移动医疗技术比较分析

IF 1.6 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1109/TPC.2024.3380408
Anirban Ray;Ian R. Weaver;G. Edzordzi Agbozo;Yeqing Kong
{"title":"绘制全球健康干预措施中的交互设计图:COVID-19 移动医疗技术比较分析","authors":"Anirban Ray;Ian R. Weaver;G. Edzordzi Agbozo;Yeqing Kong","doi":"10.1109/TPC.2024.3380408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<bold><i>Background:</i></b>\n Technologies are increasingly being deployed in facilitating participatory healthcare. Global governments developed a variety of digital platforms, such as mobile contact tracing apps, to help the public navigate risks and uncertainties during the COVID-19 pandemic. \n<bold><i>Literature review:</i></b>\n Contrary to normative approaches to information design (IxD), the global spread of COVID-19 revealed the need for an alternative design framework (i.e., concept-driven design) to help develop mobile health (mHealth) apps that can support a broader portrayal of information value in IxD. \n<bold><i>Research questions:</i></b>\n 1. In response to COVID-19, what affordances are prioritized by the designers of these global mHealth apps? What do these priorities tell us about design intents and information value? 2. What interpretive framework can we use to understand mHealth designers’ intent across different geopolitical contexts? \n<bold><i>Research methodology:</i></b>\n We captured screenshots of the three apps in the US, India, and China, as well as a website in Ghana. Using touchpoints as the unit of analysis, we conducted an inventory and affinity mapping to visualize the architecture of each app and categorize touchpoints based on their affordances. \n<bold><i>Results:</i></b>\n The comparison of apps across countries displays shared and divergent priorities in their touchpoints, affordances, and information depth. We developed an interpretive framework for understanding mHealth design intent across numerous contexts—Common Interpretive Framework for Design Analysis (CIFDA)—incorporating both linear analysis and recursive analysis of touchpoints, affordances, and depth. \n<bold><i>Conclusions:</i></b>\n Touchpoints in mHealth applications can be designed, but they can also be measured and analyzed, and they can in return help us understand the designer's intent and expected user experience.","PeriodicalId":46950,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication","volume":"67 2","pages":"173-191"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping Interaction Design in Global Health Interventions: A Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 mHealth Technologies\",\"authors\":\"Anirban Ray;Ian R. Weaver;G. Edzordzi Agbozo;Yeqing Kong\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TPC.2024.3380408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<bold><i>Background:</i></b>\\n Technologies are increasingly being deployed in facilitating participatory healthcare. Global governments developed a variety of digital platforms, such as mobile contact tracing apps, to help the public navigate risks and uncertainties during the COVID-19 pandemic. \\n<bold><i>Literature review:</i></b>\\n Contrary to normative approaches to information design (IxD), the global spread of COVID-19 revealed the need for an alternative design framework (i.e., concept-driven design) to help develop mobile health (mHealth) apps that can support a broader portrayal of information value in IxD. \\n<bold><i>Research questions:</i></b>\\n 1. In response to COVID-19, what affordances are prioritized by the designers of these global mHealth apps? What do these priorities tell us about design intents and information value? 2. What interpretive framework can we use to understand mHealth designers’ intent across different geopolitical contexts? \\n<bold><i>Research methodology:</i></b>\\n We captured screenshots of the three apps in the US, India, and China, as well as a website in Ghana. Using touchpoints as the unit of analysis, we conducted an inventory and affinity mapping to visualize the architecture of each app and categorize touchpoints based on their affordances. \\n<bold><i>Results:</i></b>\\n The comparison of apps across countries displays shared and divergent priorities in their touchpoints, affordances, and information depth. We developed an interpretive framework for understanding mHealth design intent across numerous contexts—Common Interpretive Framework for Design Analysis (CIFDA)—incorporating both linear analysis and recursive analysis of touchpoints, affordances, and depth. \\n<bold><i>Conclusions:</i></b>\\n Touchpoints in mHealth applications can be designed, but they can also be measured and analyzed, and they can in return help us understand the designer's intent and expected user experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46950,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication\",\"volume\":\"67 2\",\"pages\":\"173-191\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10516701/\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10516701/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:越来越多的技术被用于促进参与式医疗保健。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,全球政府开发了各种数字平台,如移动联系人追踪应用程序,以帮助公众应对风险和不确定性。文献回顾:与信息设计(IxD)的规范方法相反,COVID-19 在全球的传播揭示了对另一种设计框架(即概念驱动设计)的需求,以帮助开发移动医疗(mHealth)应用程序,从而支持在 IxD 中对信息价值进行更广泛的描述。研究问题1.针对 COVID-19,这些全球移动医疗应用程序的设计者优先考虑了哪些负担能力?这些优先事项对我们的设计意图和信息价值有何启示?2.我们可以用什么解释框架来理解不同地缘政治背景下移动医疗设计者的意图?研究方法:我们截取了美国、印度和中国的三款应用程序以及加纳的一个网站的截图。以接触点为分析单位,我们进行了一次清点和亲和图绘制,以直观显示每个应用程序的架构,并根据其承受能力对接触点进行分类。结果通过对不同国家的应用程序进行比较,我们发现这些应用程序在接触点、可承受性和信息深度方面既有共同的优先事项,也有不同的优先事项。我们开发了一个解释性框架--设计分析的通用解释性框架(CIFDA)--结合了触点、承受能力和深度的线性分析和递归分析,用于理解不同背景下移动医疗的设计意图。结论:移动医疗应用中的接触点可以设计,但也可以测量和分析,它们可以帮助我们理解设计者的意图和预期的用户体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Mapping Interaction Design in Global Health Interventions: A Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 mHealth Technologies
Background: Technologies are increasingly being deployed in facilitating participatory healthcare. Global governments developed a variety of digital platforms, such as mobile contact tracing apps, to help the public navigate risks and uncertainties during the COVID-19 pandemic. Literature review: Contrary to normative approaches to information design (IxD), the global spread of COVID-19 revealed the need for an alternative design framework (i.e., concept-driven design) to help develop mobile health (mHealth) apps that can support a broader portrayal of information value in IxD. Research questions: 1. In response to COVID-19, what affordances are prioritized by the designers of these global mHealth apps? What do these priorities tell us about design intents and information value? 2. What interpretive framework can we use to understand mHealth designers’ intent across different geopolitical contexts? Research methodology: We captured screenshots of the three apps in the US, India, and China, as well as a website in Ghana. Using touchpoints as the unit of analysis, we conducted an inventory and affinity mapping to visualize the architecture of each app and categorize touchpoints based on their affordances. Results: The comparison of apps across countries displays shared and divergent priorities in their touchpoints, affordances, and information depth. We developed an interpretive framework for understanding mHealth design intent across numerous contexts—Common Interpretive Framework for Design Analysis (CIFDA)—incorporating both linear analysis and recursive analysis of touchpoints, affordances, and depth. Conclusions: Touchpoints in mHealth applications can be designed, but they can also be measured and analyzed, and they can in return help us understand the designer's intent and expected user experience.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to applied research on professional communication—including but not limited to technical and business communication. Papers should address the research interests and needs of technical communicators, engineers, scientists, information designers, editors, linguists, translators, managers, business professionals, and others from around the globe who practice, conduct research on, and teach others about effective professional communication. The Transactions publishes original, empirical research that addresses one of these contexts: The communication practices of technical professionals, such as engineers and scientists The practices of professional communicators who work in technical or business environments Evidence-based methods for teaching and practicing professional and technical communication.
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents IEEE Professional Communication Society Information IEEE Professional Communication Society Information IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Information for Authors Getting it Wrong: Student Estimations of Time and the Number of Drafts in Linked Computer Science and Technical Communication Courses
×
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