Results

Evaluation

Results from User Study (Ordered in descending order of Health Literacy)
Score & False Positives vs time spent using the interfaces

Summary Statistics

PrototypeControl
Score Median4.55.5
Score Mean55.625
Score Std Dev1.8521.923
False Positives Median1.52.5
False Positives Mean1.6255
False Positives Std Dev1.7685.707
Study Descriptive Statistics (Score was out of 10)
Health Literacy ScoreHealth Literacy
Median11.5Problematic
Mean11.75
Std Dev2.712
Participant’s Health Literacy Summary[13]
System Usability Scale
Score Median70
Score Mean68.75
Score Std Dev6.547
Usability Score (>= 70 is a good interface)[15]

Proposed Guidelines

Methodological & Design Guidelines

  • Methodological Guideline 1: Understanding and Designing for Stakeholders • Identify and design from the perspective of the most vulnerable stakeholder and prioritize those needs when incorporating other stakeholder’s requirements.
  • Methodological Guideline 2: Data Provenance • Trace the production of data to understand the shortcomings of its creation and always maintain a critical attitude to what the data should represent
  • Design Guideline 1: Supporting Health Literacy • Support automation by using a controlled vocabulary, such as a clinical data ontology, to streamline the data capture process.
  • Design Guideline 2: Prioritizing Interactivity and Visual Feedback • Accommodate the health consumer’s health literacy through visual mapping of the controlled vocabulary to facilitate interaction and visual feedback.

Icons from the Noun Project

Please rate my project!

Rating: 1 out of 5.

References

[1] NIH. (2016). The Cost of Sequencing a Human Genome. Retrieved from https://www.genome.gov/27565109/the-cost-of-sequencing-a-human-genome/

[2] Thomas, J. J., & Cook, K. A. (2005). Illuminating the path: The research and development agenda for visual analytics. IEEE Computer Society, 184. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2011.00006

[3] Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford University. (2020). Get Started with Design Thinking. from https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources/getting-started-with-design-thinking

[4] Nielsen Norman Group. (2020). Design thinking 101. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/design-thinking/

[5] Pink, S., & Morgan, J. (2013). Short-term ethnography: Intense routes to knowing. Symbolic Interaction, 36(3), 351–361. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.66

[6] Millen, D. R. (2000). Rapid ethnography: Time deepening strategies for HCI field research. Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, DIS, 280–286.

[7] Geysler, C., & Swarts, J. (2019). Coding Streams of Language. Techniques for the Systematic Coding of Text, Talk, and Other Verbal Data. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

[8] Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/01636609209550084

[9] Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511637

[10] Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. MIT Press.

[11] Robinson, P. N., & Mundlos, S. (2010). The Human Phenotype Ontology. Clinical Genetics, 77(6), 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2010.01436.x

[12] Köhler, S., Vasilevsky, N. A., Engelstad, M., Foster, E., McMurry, J., Aymé, S., … Robinson, P. N. (2017). The human phenotype ontology in 2017. Nucleic Acids Research, 45(D1), D865–D876. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw1039

[13] Sorensen, K., Van den Broucke, S., Pelikan, J., Fullam, J., Doyle, G., Slonska, Z., … Brand, H. (2013). Measuring health literacy in populations: illuminating the design and development process of HLS-EU-Q. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 948. https://doi.org/doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-948

[14] U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2020). System Usability Scale (SUS). Retrieved February 4, 2020, from https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/system-usability-scale.html

[15] Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802205776