BETTER-Project: Web Accessibility for Persons with Mental Disorders

  • Renaldo Bernard
  • Carla Sabariego
  • David Baldwin
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • Alarcos Cieza
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9171)


The paper outlines a methodology proposed to give impetus to a collaborative effort involving integral stakeholders to determine whether Web accessibility facilitation measures must be adapted for people with depression and anxiety, and if so, in what way(s). The methodology has three-phases: (1) identification of Web accessibility barriers using two data sources: a systematic review of pertinent literature and focus group interviews with people with depression and anxiety; (2) validation of current Web accessibility facilitation measures for this population using experimental user-testing; (3) provision of expertise-based recommendations for the improvement of Web accessibility facilitation measures using a delphi method. If adopted, the study’s findings are expected to herald improvements in the Web browsing experiences of people with depression and anxiety, and also everyone else who use the Web.


Protocol Web accessibility Depression Anxiety Mental disorders 



The research leading to these results has received funding from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007 - 2013 under REA grant agreement no 316795.


  1. 1.
    van Weert, T.J.: Education of the twenty-first century: new professionalism in lifelong learning, knowledge development and knowledge sharing. Educ. Inf. Technol. 11(3–4), 217–237 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sellen, A.J., Murphy, R., Shaw, K.L.: How knowledge workers use the web. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parks, M.R., Roberts, L.D.: Making MOOsic’: the development of personal relationships on line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. J. Soc. Person. Relat. 15(4), 517–537 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parks, M.R., Floyd, K.: Making friends in cyberspace. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 1(4), 80–97 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, T.J., Kaye, B.K.: Around the World Wide Web in 80 ways how motives for going online are linked to Internet activities among politically interested Internet users. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 21(3), 304–325 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferguson, D.A., Perse, E.M.: The World Wide Web as a functional alternative to television. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 44(2), 155–174 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Consortium, W.W.W. Diversity of Web Users. 2008 2012 10 September 2014.
  8. 8.
    Barreto, A.: Visual impairments. In: Harpar, S., Yesilada, Y. (eds.) Web Accessibility: A Foundation For Research. Springer, London (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Trewin, S.: Physical impairments. In: Harper, S., Yesilada, Y. (eds.) Web Accessibility: A Foundation For Research. Springer, London (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rotondi, A.J., et al.: Designing websites for persons with cognitive deficits: design and usability of a psychoeducational intervention for persons with severe mental illness. Psychol. Serv. 4(3), 202–224 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Good, A., Sambhanthan, A.: Accessing Web based health care and resources for mental health: interface design considerations for people experiencing mental illness. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2014, Part III. LNCS, vol. 8519, pp. 25–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferron, J.C., et al.: Developing a quit smoking website that is usable by people with severe mental illnesses. Psychiatr. Rehabil. J. 35(2), 111 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mariger, H. Cognitive Disabilities and the Web: Where Accessibility and Usability Meet? (2006) [cited 2014 01 September 2014].
  14. 14.
    Kummervold, P.E., et al.: Social support in a wired world: use of online mental health forums in Norway. Nord. J. Psychiatry 56(1), 59–65 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Powell, J., McCarthy, N., Eysenbach, G.: Cross-sectional survey of users of Internet depression communities. BMC psychiatry 3(1), 19 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Winzelberg, A.J., et al.: Effectiveness of an Internet-based program for reducing risk factors for eating disorders. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 68(2), 346 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Christensen, H., Griffiths, K.M.: The prevention of depression using the Internet. Med. J. Aust. 177, S122–S125 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carlbring, P., et al.: Treatment of panic disorder via the Internet: a randomized trial of a self-help program. Behav. Ther. 32(4), 751–764 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clarke, G., et al.: Overcoming depression on the Internet (ODIN): a randomized controlled trial of an Internet depression skills intervention program. Journal of medical Internet research 4(3), e14 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Organization, W.H., The World health report: 2001: Mental health: new understanding, new hope (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kessler, R.C., et al.: Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of mental disorders in the World Health Organization’s World Mental Health Survey Initiative. World Psychiatry 6(3), 168 (2007)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Whiteford, H.A., et al.: Global burden of disease attributable to mental and substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 382(9904), 1575–1586 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Collaboration, T.C. Glossary. 27 February 2015 (2004).
  24. 24.
    Popay, J.: Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A product from the ESRC methods programme. Institute of Health Research, Lancaster (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lloyd-Evans, S.: Focus groups. In: Desai, V., Potter, R. (eds.) Doing Development Research, pp. 153–163. SAGE Publication, London (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liamputtong, P.: Focus Group Methodology: Principle And Practice. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hargittai, E., Hsieh, Y.P.: Succinct survey measures of web-use skills. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 30(1), 95–107 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Paul, G., Stegbauer, C.: Is the digital divide between young and elderly people increasing? First Monday, 2005. 10(10)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Morrell, R.W., Mayhorn, C.B., Bennett, J.: A survey of World Wide Web use in middle-aged and older adults. Hum Factors: J. Hum. Factor Ergono. Soc. 42(2), 175–182 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ritchie, J., Spencer, L.: Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Huberman, A.M., Miles, M.B. (eds.) The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion, pp. 305–329. SAGE Publication, Thousand Oaks (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rabiee, F.: Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 63(04), 655–660 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gray, W.D., Salzman, M.C.: Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Hum. Comput. Interact. 13(3), 203–261 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hsu, C.-C., Sandford, B.A.: The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 12(10), 1–8 (2007)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Miller, G: Determining what could/should be: the delphi technique and its application. In: 2006 Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus, Ohio (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dalkey, N.C., Brown, B.B., Cochran, S.: The Delphi Method: An Experimental Study of Group Opinion, vol. 3. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica (1969)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pill, J.: The Delphi method: substance, context, a critique and an annotated bibliography. Socio-Econ. Plann. Sci. 5(1), 57–71 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ludwig, B.: Predicting the future: have you considered using the delphi methodology. J. Ext. 35(5), 1–4 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Renaldo Bernard
    • 1
  • Carla Sabariego
    • 1
  • David Baldwin
    • 2
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra
    • 3
  • Alarcos Cieza
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Research Unit for Biopsychosocial Health, Institute for Public Health and Health Services Research, Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology—IBELudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  3. 3.Web Accessibility InitiativeWorld Wide Web ConsortiumBerlinGermany
  4. 4.School of PsychologyUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  5. 5.Prevention of Blindness and Deafness, Disability and Rehabilitation UnitWorld Health OrganisationGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations