User preferences for adaptive user interfaces in health information systems


An adaptive user interface requires identification of user requirements. Interface designers and engineers must understand end-user interaction with the system to improve user interface design. A combination of interviews and observations is applied for user requirement analysis in health information systems (HIS). Then, user preferences are categorized in this paper as either data entry, language and vocabulary, information presentation, or help, warning and feedback. The user preferences in these categories were evaluated using the focus group method. Focus group sessions with different types of HIS users comprising medical staff (with and without computer skills) and system administrators identified each user group’s preference for the initial adaptation of the HIS user interface. User needs and requirements must be identified to adapt the interface to users during data entry into the system. System designers must understand user interactions with the system to identify their needs and preferences. Without this, interface design cannot be adapted to users and users will not be comfortable using the system and eventually abandon its use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2


  1. 1.

    Findlater, L.K.: Comparing static, adaptable, and adaptive menus. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia (2004)

  2. 2.

    Jungchul Park SHH: Complementary menus: combining adaptable and adaptive approaches or menu interface. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 41, 305–316 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Vasilyeva, E. Pechenizkiy, M., Puuronen, S.: Towards the framework of adaptive user interfaces for eHealth. In: 18th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS’05) (2005)

  4. 4.

    Ramachandran, K.: Adaptive user interfaces for health care applications.9 (2009)

  5. 5.

    Talia Lavie, J.M.: Benefits and costs of adaptive user interfaces. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 68, 508–524 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Sommerville, I.: Software Engineering. Addison Wesley, Boston (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Tang, P.C., Patel, V.L.: Major issues in user interface design for health professional workstations: summary and recommendations. Int. J. Biomed. Comput. 34(1–4), 139–148 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Mandel, T.: The Elements of User Interface Design, 2nd edn, p. 2002. Wiley, Australia (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Shneiderman, B.: Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction (2010)

  10. 10.

    Patel, V. L., Kushniruk, A. W.: Interface design for health care environments: the role of cognitive science. In: Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium. American Medical Informatics Association, pp. 29–37 (1998)

  11. 11.

    Lacramioara Stoicu-Tivadar VS-T: Human—computer interaction reflected in the design of user interfaces for general practitioners. Int. J. Med. Inform. 75, 335–342 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Preece, J., Sharp, H.: Interaction design: beyond human- computer interaction (2011)

  13. 13.

    Jaspers, M.W.M., Steen, T., Cvd, Bos, Geenen, M.: The think aloud method: a guide to user interface design. Int. J. Med. Inform. 73(11–12), 781–795 (2004). doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2004.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jaspers, M.W.M.: A comparison of usability methods for testing interactive health technologies: Methodological aspects and empirical evidence. Int. J. Med. Inform. 78, 340–353 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Medhi, I., Patnaik, S., Brunskill, E., Gautama, S.N.N., Thies, W., Toyama, K.: Designing mobile interfaces for novice and low-literacy users. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. (2011). doi:10.1145/1959022.1959024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Andre, W., Kushniruk, V.L.P.: Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J. Biomed. Inform. 37, 56–76 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Johnson, C.M., Johnson, T.R., Zhang, J.: A user-centered framework for redesigning health care interfaces. J. Biomed. Inform. 38(1), 75–87 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Salman, Y.B., Cheng, H.-I., Patterson, P.E.: Icon and user interface design for emergency medical information systems: a case study. Int. J. Med. Inform. 81(1), 29–35 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.08.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kinzie, M., Cohn, W., Knaus, W.: The importance of heuristic evaluation and usability testing in the user interface design for a family health history web site. In: American Medical Informatics Association (2001)

  20. 20.

    Longo, L., Kane, B.: A novel methodology for evaluating user interfaces in health care. In: IEEE 24th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS), pp. 1–6. Bristol (2011)

  21. 21.

    Kuqi, K.E.T., Holzer, T., Sarkani, S., Levin, J., Crowley, R.: Design of electronic medical record user interfaces: a matrix-based method for improving usability. J. Healthc. Eng 4(3), 35 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Lun, K.: New user interfaces. Int. J. Biomed. Comput. 39, 147–150 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Alsos, O.A., Das, A.,Svanaes, D.: Mobile health IT: the effect of user interface and form factor on doctor-patient communication. Int. J. Med. Inform. 81, 12–28 (2011). doi:S1386-5056(11)00195-X [pii]10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.09.004

  24. 24.

    Joseph, W., Yoder, D.E.S., Williams, B.T.: The medigate graphical user interface for entry of physical findings: design principles and implementation. J. Med. Syst. 22(5), 325–337 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Hyun, S., Johnson, S.B., Stetson, P.D., Bakken, S.: Development and evaluation of nursing user interface screens using multiple methods. J. Biomed. Inform. 42(6), 1004–1012 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2009.05.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Magdum, V.C.: Development of graphical user interface for heart rate variability analysis of sleep-disordered breathing. EP10578, The University of Texas at El Paso, United States–Texas, (2004)

  27. 27.

    Borges, J.A., Rodriguez, N.J., Perez, C., Crespo, G.: Usability issues in the development of a user interface for an alerts and reminders system for a nursing documentation application, vol. 4553. LNCS, Beijing (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Hanzlicek, P., Spidlen, J., Heroutova, H., Nagy, M.: User interface of MUDR electronic health record. Int. J. Med. Inform. 74(2–4), 221–227 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2004.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Peters, K.A., Green, T.F., Schumacher, R.M.: Improving the user interface and adoption of online personal health records, vol. 2. San Antonio, Texas (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Chun, Y.J., Patterson, P.E.: A suggestion for future research on interface design of an internet-based telemedicine system for the elderly. Work J. Prev. Assess. Ehabilit. 41, 353–356 (2012). doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-0181-353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Peters, K., Niebling, M., Slimmer, C., Green, T., Webb, J.M., Schumacher, R.: Usability guidance for improving the user interface and adoption of online personal health records. In: Proceedings the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 11, pp. 704–708. User centric, Inc, Oakbrook Terrace, IL (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Zheng, k., Padman, R., Johnson, M.P.: User interface optimization for an electronic medical record system. In: Medinfo: 2007 Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Health(Medical) Informatics; Building Sustainable Health Systems, p. 1058. IOS Press Amsterdam (2007)

  33. 33.

    Chen, K., Hellerstein, J.M., Parikh, T.S.: Designing adaptive feedback for improving data entry accuracy. In: Proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, (2010)

  34. 34.

    Findlater, L., McGrenere, J.: Impact of screen size on performance, awareness, and user satisfaction with adaptive graphical user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems ACM, (2008)

  35. 35.

    Stephanidis, C., Paramythis, A., Sfyrakis, M., Stergiou, A., Maou, N., Leventis, A., Paparoulis, G., Karagiannidis, C.: Adaptable and adaptive user interfaces for disabled users in the avanti project. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligence and Services in Networks: Technology for Ubiquitous Telecom Services, pp. 153–166, Springer, UK (1998)

  36. 36.

    Jimison, H.B., Pavel, M., Pavel, J.: Adaptive interfaces for home health. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for Pervasive Healthcare, (2003)

  37. 37.

    Vogt, J., Meier, A.: An adaptive user interface framework for eHealth services based on UIML. In: Proceedings of the BLED, (2010)

  38. 38.

    Nguyen, N.T., Sobecki, J.: Using consensus methods to construct adaptive interfaces in multimodal web-based systems. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2(4), 342–358 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Shakshuki, E.M., Reid, M., Sheltami, T.R.: An adaptive user interface in healthcare. Proced. Comput. Sci. 1(56), 49–58 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Morgan, D.L., Krueger, R.A.: The Focus Group Kit. p. 1–6. SAGE Publications, Thousandoaks (1997)

  41. 41.

    Lazar, J., Feng, J.H., Hochheiser, H.: Research methods in human-computer interaction. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Firoozabadi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eslami, M., Firoozabadi, M. & Homayounvala, E. User preferences for adaptive user interfaces in health information systems. Univ Access Inf Soc 17, 875–883 (2018).

Download citation


  • Adaptive user interface
  • Focus group
  • Health information systems
  • Usability
  • User preferences