Designing Survey-Based Mobile Interfaces for Rural Patients With Cancer Using Apple’s ResearchKit and CareKit: Usability Study

Abstract

BackgroundDespite the increased accessibility and availability of technology in recent years, equality and access to health-related technology remain limited to some demographics. In particular, patients who are older or from rural communities represent a large segment of people who are currently underusing mobile health (mHealth) solutions. System usability continues to hinder mHealth adoption among users with nontraditional digital literacy. ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate if state-of-the-art mobile app interfaces from open-source libraries provide sufficient usability for rural patients with cancer, with minimal design changes and forgoing the co-design process. MethodsWe developed Assuage (Network Reconnaissance Lab) as a research platform for any mHealth study. We conducted a pilot study using Assuage to assess the usability of 4 mobile user interfaces (UIs) based on open-source libraries from Apple’s ResearchKit and CareKit. These UIs varied in complexity for reporting distress symptoms. Patients with cancer were recruited at the Markey Cancer Center, and all research procedures were conducted in person. Participants completed the distress assessment using a randomly selected UI in Assuage with little to no assistance. Data were collected on participant age, location, mobile app use, and familiarity with mHealth apps. Participants rated usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS), and usability issues were documented and compared. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare the effect of the UIs on the SUS scores. ResultsWe recruited 30 current or postsurgery patients with cancer for this pilot study. Most participants were aged >50 years (24/30, 80%), from rural areas (25/30, 83%), had up to a high school education (19/30, 63%), and were unfamiliar with mHealth apps (21/30, 70%). General mobile app use was split, with 43% (14/30) of the patients not regularly using mobile apps. The mean SUS score across the UIs was 75.8 (SD 22.2), with UI 3 and UI 4 achieving an SUS score ≥80, meeting the industry standard for good usability of 80. Critical usability issues were related to data input and navigation with touch devices, such as scale-format questions, vertical scrolling, and traversing multiple screens. ConclusionsThe findings from this study show that most patients with cancer (20/30, 67%) who participated in this study rated the different interfaces of Assuage as above-average usability (SUS score >68). This suggests that Apple’s ResearchKit and CareKit libraries can provide usable UIs for older and rural users with minimal interface alterations. When resources are limited, the design stage can be simplified by omitting the co-design process while preserving suitable usability for users with nontraditional technical proficiency. Usability comparable to industry standards can be achieved by considering heuristics for interface and electronic survey design, specifically how to segment and navigate surveys, present important interface elements, and signal gestural interactions.