A usability study of a mHealth system for diabetes self-management based on framework analysis and usability problem taxonomy methods

  • Jesús FontechaEmail author
  • Iván González
  • José Bravo
Original Research


Self-management of diabetes through the use of mobile and software systems is a reality today. Among other aspects, usability of these systems determines their continued use by patients, closely related to the concepts of engagement, empowerment and treatment adherence. In this work, we present a detailed usability study of a mHealth system for diabetes self-management by means of an evaluation process, which includes the acquisition of usability data through a hybrid approach and a heuristic evaluation. In addition, data analysis was performed by using framework analysis and usability problem taxonomy. As a result, a set of consolidated usability problems categorized by severity index, source, and other factors is presented and studied, also taking into account the impact of these types of issues from the diabetic patients perspective.


Diabetes self-management mHealth Usability Framework analysis Usability problem taxonomy 



This work has been supported by MAPFRE Foundation and the Plan Propio de Investigación program from Castilla-La Mancha University. Authors gratefully acknowledge the participation and collaboration of all diabetic users, and also M. Estrella Saucedo and M. José Sánchez as clinical experts, in the evaluation process.

Supplementary material

12652_2019_1369_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (402 kb)
Supplementary file1 (PDF 403 kb)
12652_2019_1369_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (230 kb)
Supplementary file2 (PDF 230 kb)
12652_2019_1369_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (223 kb)
Supplementary file3 (PDF 224 kb)
12652_2019_1369_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (314 kb)
Supplementary file4 (PDF 314 kb)
12652_2019_1369_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (421 kb)
Supplementary file5 (PDF 422 kb)


  1. Brooke J (2013) Sus: a retrospective. J Usability Stud 8(2):29–40Google Scholar
  2. Carroll J, Kellogg W, Rosson M (1991) designing interaction: psychology at the human–computer interface. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 74–102Google Scholar
  3. Castelnuovo G, Mauri G, Waki K (2016) mhealth and ehealth for obesity and types 2 an 1 diabetes. Journal of Diabetes Research 2016
  4. Cheng VW (2017) Studying the effectiveness of game-based solutions in a wellbeing app. In: Extended abstracts publication of the annual symposium on computer–human interaction in Play, pp 691–694,
  5. Cornet V, Holden R (2018) Systematic review of smartphone-based passive sensing for health and wellbeing. J Biomed Inf 77:120–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Costa A, de Souza F, Moreira A, de Souza D (2018) Webqda 2.0 versus webqda 3.0: a comparative study about usability of qualitative data analysis software. Stud Comput Intell 718:229–240. Google Scholar
  7. Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1993) Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Fontecha J, Gonzalez I, Saucedo ME, Sanchez MJ, Bravo J (2017) Usability and acceptance of a mobile and cloud-based platform for supporting diabetes self-management. In: Ochoa S, Singh P, Bravo J (eds) Ubiquitous computing and ambient intelligence, Springer, Cham, vol 10586, pp 227–239, DOI 0.1007/978-3-319-67585-5\_24,
  9. Fortino G, Gravina R (2015) A cloud-assisted wearable system for physical rehabilitation. In: Fardoun H, Penichet V, Alghazzawi D (eds) ICTs for improving patients rehabilitation research techniques. communications in computer and information science, vol 515. Springer, Berlin, pp 168–182. Google Scholar
  10. Franklin A, Myneni S (2018) Engagement and design barriers of mhealth applications for older adults. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series.
  11. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology 13(117)Google Scholar
  12. Georgsson M, Staggers N (2016a) An evaluation of patients experienced usability of a diabetes mhealth system using a multi-method approach. J Biomed Inf 56:115–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Georgsson M, Staggers N (2016b) Quantifying usability: an evaluation of a diabetes mhealth system on effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction metrics with associated user characteristics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 23(1):5–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamari J, Koivisto J (2015) Why do people use gamification services? Int J Inf Manag 35(4):419–431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hartz J, Yingling L, Powel-Wiley T (2016) Use of mobile technology in the prevention and management of diabetes mellitus. Curr Cardiol Rep 18(12):130. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hwang W, Salvendy G (2010) Number of people required for usability evaluation: the 102 rule. Commun ACM 53(5):130–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Iltchev P, Sliwczyiski A, Szynkiewicz P, Marczak M (2016) M-health innovations for patient-centered care, IGI Global, chap Mobile health applications assisting patients with chronic diseases: Examples from asthma care, pp 170–196.
  18. Isakovic M, Sedlar U, Volk M, Bester J (2016) Usability pitfalls of diabetes mhealth apps for the elderly. J Diabetes ResGoogle Scholar
  19. Istepanian R, Lacal J (2003) Emerging mobile communication technologies for health: some imperative notes on m-health. In: IEEE (ed) A new beginning for human health. In: Proceddings of the 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, vol 2, pp 1414–1416Google Scholar
  20. Jia G, Yang P, Zhou J, Zhang H, Lin C, Chen J, Yan J, Ning G (2015) A framework design for the mhealth system for self-management promotion. Biomed Mater Eng 26(s1):s1731–s1740. Google Scholar
  21. Karsh BT, Weinger MB, Abbott PA, Wears RL (2010) Health information technology: fallacies and sober realities. J Am Med Inform Assoc 17(6):617–623. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keenan SL, Harstson HR, Kafura DG, Schulman RS (1999) The usability problem taxonomy: a framework for classification and analysis. Empir Softw Eng 4(1):71–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Klimova B (2017) Mobile devices and mobile applications used in parkinsons disease. In: 14th international conference on mobile web and intelligent information systems, Springer, vol 10486, pp 137–143Google Scholar
  24. Kushniruk A, Patel V (2004) Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J Biomed Inform 37(1):56–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lamprinos I, Demski H, Mantwill S, Kabak Y, Hildebrand C, Ploessnig M (2016) Modular ict-based patient empowerment framework for self-management of diabetes: design perspectives and validation results. Int J Med Inf 91:31–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lanzola G, Losiuk E, Favero S, Facchinetti A, Galderisi A, Quaglini S, Magni L, Cobelli C (2016) Remote blood glucose monitoring in mhealth scenarios: a review. Sensors 16(12):2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewis J (2018) Measuring perceived usability: the CSUQ, SUS, and UMUX. Int J Hum Comput Inter 34:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Logan A (2013) Transforming hypertension management using mobile health technology for telemonitoring and self-care support. Can J Cardiol 29(5):579–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McKay F, Cheng C, Wright A, Shill J, Stephens H, Uccellini M (2018) Evaluating mobile phone applications for health behaviour change: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare 24(1):22–30. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nielsen J, Landauer T (1993) A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: Proceedings of the INTERACT 93 and CHI 93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, pp 206–213Google Scholar
  31. Nielsen J, Molich R (1990) Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACMGoogle Scholar
  32. Ritchie J, Spencer L (1994) Analyzing qualitative data, SAGE, chap qualitative data analysis for applied policy research, pp 173–194Google Scholar
  33. Sardi L, Idri A, Fernandez-Aleman J (2017) A systematic review of gamification in e-health. J Biomed Inf 71:31–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shneidermann B (1998) Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human–computer interaction. Addison-Wesley Longman, BostonGoogle Scholar
  35. Slater H, Campbell J, Stinson J, Burley M, Briggs A (2017) End user and implementer experiences of mhealth technologies for noncommunicable chronic disease management in young adults: Systematic review. J Med Internet Res 19(12):e406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tatara N, Arsand E, Skrovseth S, Hartvigsen G (2013) Long-term engagement with a mobile self-management system for people with type 2 diabetes. J Med Internet Res 13(3):e1. Google Scholar
  37. Travis D (2009) How to prioritise usability problems. Tech. rep., UserFocus,, accessed on February 21, 2018
  38. Villarreal V, Fontecha J, Hervs R, Bravo J (2014) Mobile and ubiquitous architecture for the medical control of chronic diseases through the use of intelligent devices: Using the architecture for patients with diabetes. Future Gener Comput Syst 34:161–175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Virzi R (1992) Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum Factors 34(4):457–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wong-Rieger D, Rieger FP (2013) Health coaching in diabetes: empowering patients to self-manage. Can J Diabetes 37(1):41–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zapata B, Fernandez-Aleman J, Idri A, Toval A (2015) Empirical studies on usability of mhealth apps: a system literature review. J Med Syst 39(2):1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zapata BC, Fernandez-Aleman J, Toval A, Idri A (2018) Reusable software usability specifications for mHealth applications. J Med Syst 42(3):451. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Castilla-La ManchaCiudad RealSpain

Personalised recommendations