Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: mHealth
- Genre: Academic theses
- Creators: Amresh, Ashish
- Creators: Buman, Matthew P
Description
Many individual-level behavioral interventions improve health and well-being. However, most interventions exhibit considerable heterogeneity in response. Put differently, what might be effective on average might not be effective for specific individuals. From an individual’s perspective, many healthy behaviors exist that seem to have a positive impact. However, few existing tools support people in identifying interventions that work for them, personally.
One approach to support such personalization is via self-experimentation using single-case designs. ‘Hack Your Health’ is a tool that guides individuals through an 18-day self-experiment to test if an intervention they choose (e.g., meditation, gratitude journaling) improves their own psychological well-being (e.g., stress, happiness), whether it fits in their routine, and whether they enjoy it.
The purpose of this work was to conduct a formative evaluation of Hack Your Health to examine user burden, adherence, and to evaluate its usefulness in supporting decision-making about a health intervention. A mixed-methods approach was used, and two versions of the tool were tested via two waves of participants (Wave 1, N=20; Wave 2, N=8). Participants completed their self-experiments and provided feedback via follow-up surveys (n=26) and interviews (n=20).
Findings indicated that the tool had high usability and low burden overall. Average survey completion rate was 91%, and compliance to protocol was 72%. Overall, participants found the experience useful to test if their chosen intervention helped them. However, there were discrepancies between participants’ intuition about intervention effect and results from analyses. Participants often relied on intuition/lived experience over results for decision-making. This suggested that the usefulness of Hack Your Health in its current form might be through the structure, accountability, and means for self-reflection it provided rather than the specific experimental design/results. Additionally, situations where performing interventions within a rigorous/restrictive experimental set-up may not be appropriate (e.g., when goal is to assess intervention enjoyment) were uncovered. Plausible design implications include: longer experimental and phase durations, accounting for non-compliance, missingness, and proximal/acute effects, and exploring strategies to complement quantitative data with participants’ lived experiences with interventions to effectively support decision-making. Future work should explore ways to balance scientific rigor with participants’ needs for such decision-making.
One approach to support such personalization is via self-experimentation using single-case designs. ‘Hack Your Health’ is a tool that guides individuals through an 18-day self-experiment to test if an intervention they choose (e.g., meditation, gratitude journaling) improves their own psychological well-being (e.g., stress, happiness), whether it fits in their routine, and whether they enjoy it.
The purpose of this work was to conduct a formative evaluation of Hack Your Health to examine user burden, adherence, and to evaluate its usefulness in supporting decision-making about a health intervention. A mixed-methods approach was used, and two versions of the tool were tested via two waves of participants (Wave 1, N=20; Wave 2, N=8). Participants completed their self-experiments and provided feedback via follow-up surveys (n=26) and interviews (n=20).
Findings indicated that the tool had high usability and low burden overall. Average survey completion rate was 91%, and compliance to protocol was 72%. Overall, participants found the experience useful to test if their chosen intervention helped them. However, there were discrepancies between participants’ intuition about intervention effect and results from analyses. Participants often relied on intuition/lived experience over results for decision-making. This suggested that the usefulness of Hack Your Health in its current form might be through the structure, accountability, and means for self-reflection it provided rather than the specific experimental design/results. Additionally, situations where performing interventions within a rigorous/restrictive experimental set-up may not be appropriate (e.g., when goal is to assess intervention enjoyment) were uncovered. Plausible design implications include: longer experimental and phase durations, accounting for non-compliance, missingness, and proximal/acute effects, and exploring strategies to complement quantitative data with participants’ lived experiences with interventions to effectively support decision-making. Future work should explore ways to balance scientific rigor with participants’ needs for such decision-making.
ContributorsPhatak, Sayali Shekhar (Author) / Buman, Matthew P (Thesis advisor) / Hekler, Eric B. (Committee member) / Huberty, Jennifer L (Committee member) / Johnston, Erik W., 1977- (Committee member) / Swan, Pamela D (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
In the last decade, the number of people who own a mobile phone or portable electronic communication device has grown exponentially. Recent advances in smartphone technology have enabled mobile devices to provide applications (“mHealth apps”) to support delivering interventions, tracking health treatments, or involving a healthcare team into the treatment process and symptom monitoring. Although the popularity of mHealth apps is increasing, few lessons have been shared regarding user experience design and evaluation for such innovations as they relate to clinical outcomes. Studies assessing usability for mobile apps primarily rely on survey instruments. Though surveys are effective in determining user perception of usability and positive attitudes towards an app, they do not directly assess app feature usage, and whether feature usage and related aspects of app design are indicative of whether intended tasks are completed by users. This is significant in the area of mHealth apps, as proper utilization of the app determines compliance to a clinical study protocol. Therefore it is important to understand how design directly impacts compliance, specifically what design factors are prevalent in non-compliant users. This research studies the impact of usability features on clinical protocol compliance by applying a mixed methods approach to usability assessment, combining traditional surveys, log analysis, and clickstream analysis to determine the connection of design to outcomes. This research is novel in its construction of the mixed methods approach and in its attempt to tie usability results to impacts on clinical protocol compliance. The validation is a case study approach, applying the methods to an mHealth app developed for early prevention of anxiety in middle school students. The results of three empirical studies are shared that support the construction of the mixed methods approach.
ContributorsPatwardhan, Mandar (Author) / Gary, Kevin A (Thesis advisor) / Pina, Armando (Committee member) / Amresh, Ashish (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
For the past decade, mobile health applications are seeing greater acceptance due to their potential to remotely monitor and increase patient engagement, particularly for chronic disease. Sickle Cell Disease is an inherited chronic disorder of red blood cells requiring careful pain management. A significant number of mHealth applications have been developed in the market to help clinicians collect and monitor information of SCD patients. Surveys are the most common way to self-report patient conditions. These are non-engaging and suffer from poor compliance. The quality of data gathered from survey instruments while using technology can be questioned as patients may be motivated to complete a task but not motivated to do it well. A compromise in quality and quantity of the collected patient data hinders the clinicians' effort to be able to monitor patient's health on a regular basis and derive effective treatment measures. This research study has two goals. The first is to monitor user compliance and data quality in mHealth apps with long and repetitive surveys delivered. The second is to identify possible motivational interventions to help improve compliance and data quality. As a form of intervention, will introduce intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors within the application and test it on a small target population. I will validate the impact of these motivational factors by performing a comparative analysis on the test results to determine improvements in user performance. This study is relevant, as it will help analyze user behavior in long and repetitive self-reporting tasks and derive measures to improve user performance. The results will assist software engineers working with doctors in designing and developing improved self-reporting mHealth applications for collecting better quality data and enhance user compliance.
ContributorsRallabhandi, Pooja (Author) / Gary, Kevin A (Thesis advisor) / Gaffar, Ashraf (Committee member) / Bansal, Srividya (Committee member) / Amresh, Ashish (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017