Objectives: This study explored the usability (user performance and satisfaction) of the self-management program for youth with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and their parents to refine the health portal prototype.
Methods: A qualitative study design with semi-structured, audio taped interviews and observation by a trained observer was undertaken with two iterative cycles to determine the usability (ease of use, efficiency, errors, and user satisfaction) of the user interface and content areas of the intervention. A purposive sample of English-speaking (n = 11; mean age = 15.4, standard deviation [SD] 1.7) and French-speaking (n = 8; mean age = 16.0, SD 1.2) adolescents with JIA and one of their respective parents/caregivers were recruited from 2 Canadian tertiary care centers. Descriptive statistics and simple content analyses were used to organize data into categories that reflected the emerging usability themes.
Usability Testing Programs
Results: All of the participants had access to a computer/Internet at home; however, adolescents were more comfortable using the computer/Internet than their parents. Adolescents and parents provided similar as well as differing suggestions on how the website user interface could be improved in terms of its usability (navigation; presentation and control usage errors; format and layout; as well as areas for further content development). There were no major differences in usability issues between English- and French-speaking participants. Minor changes to the website user interface were made and tested in a second cycle of participants. No further usability problems were identified in the second iterative cycle of testing. Teens and parents responded positively to the appearance and theme of the website (ie, promoting self-management) and felt that it was easy to navigate, use, and understand. Participants felt that the content was appropriate and geared to meet the unique needs of adolescents with JIA and their parents as well as English- and French-speaking families. Many participants responded that the interactive features (discussion board, stories of hope, and video clips of youth with JIA) made them feel supported and "not alone" in their illness.
Conclusions: We describe the usability testing of a self-management health portal designed for English- and French-speaking youth with arthritis and their parents, which uncovered several usability issues. Usability testing is a crucial step in the development of self-management health portals to ensure that the various end users (youth and parents) have the ability to access, understand, and use health-related information and services that are delivered via the Internet and that they are delivered in an efficient, effective, satisfying, and culturally competent manner.
Lookback is great for distributed design and user research teams who need to collaborate on testing. It works for moderated and unmoderated tests, and is optimized for both in-lab and remote contexts. Remote team members can watch tests live, or after the fact, and can take notes that are attached to specific video timestamps. $49/user/month, with up to ten observer-only accounts available for free.
If you need a super-efficient test suite that integrates with Jira and other project management tools, TestRail is your best option. It has a really effective dashboard, and reports not only on test results but helps you evaluate how effective your testing method actually is. Starting at $32/user/month.
We reviewed Hotjar earlier, but wanted to mention it here as well, since the free version is robust and intuitive enough to qualify it as a legitimate free option for usability testing. Upload your prototypes to the web, and use the screen recordings and heatmaps features to see how your interfaces perform in remote test contexts.
Usability Testing Tools validate the website or application for user experience (UX) and provide insights for better digital experiences. These tools will help you to make fast and confident decisions at every stage of the product life cycle. TrueList UX statistics say that 55% of companies perform any user experience testing but intentional & strategic UX can take up the conversion rates by 400%.
A website or a software application should be usable; this is the core idea of usability. Usability is something that helps the user who is having zero knowledge about how to access the website or any software application in all manners.
GTMetrix is the usability testing tool concerned with page speed. It analyzes the causes for page or site to slow down. Also, it easily identifies images, CSS, or any script error. It helps to keep track of page performance, if the page performs poorly it generates an alert. It has the ability to test the page from multiple regions.
BrowserShots verifies the performance of the website in various browsers and their various versions like Cross Browser testing. Its system requirements are Pentium III 500 MHz, RAM 256MB, Software: Python, VNC Server on Linux, Python Win32 API, on Mac NetPBM or app script.
Morae is a usability testing tool for Windows OS. It can record user interaction including mouse movements, keystrokes, etc. It is divided into two modules, i.e. Observer Module that displays sessions and the Manager Module that analyzes & edits usability tests. It is easy and useful to perform research. It is expensive and does not support Mac OS.
Usability Testing is necessary to ensure whether the system works with its intended users. This testing is generally performed simultaneously with the development life cycle thus helps to improve the design of the system consistent with technology concern.
Usability testing consists of a planned series of tests of an innovation, components of an innovation, or implementation processes. Usability testing makes use of a series of PDSA cycles to refine and improve the innovation elements or the implementation processes. It is used proactively to test the feasibility and impact of a new way of work prior to rolling out the innovation or implementation processes more broadly and/or prior to conducting an evaluation of the innovation.
Usability testing originally was developed by computer scientists as a very efficient way to develop, test, and refine new software programs or websites, both very complex endeavors. The idea is to use the PDSA processes with small groups of 4 or 5 typical users. Computer scientists found that the first group would identify most of the errors in the first version of the program. Once the errors were corrected, the next group would find different and deeper errors. By repeating this process 4 or 5 times (involving about 20 typical users in total), the program would be nearly error free and ready for general use. Researchers have found that the end user experience is improved much more by 4 tests with 5 users each than by a single test with 20 users.
It takes time and expertise to conduct a series of valid usability tests related to either the core components of an innovation or key implementation processes. Below are the steps to consider. Many of these should be familiar to you because they are built on the PDSA process detailed previously in Topic 1: Rapid-Cycle Problem-Solving.
.css-129fywwcolor:#5D97FF;.css-129fyww,.css-129fyww u,.css-129fyww i,.css-129fyww b-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;.css-129fyww:hover,.css-129fyww u:hover,.css-129fyww i:hover,.css-129fyww b:hover-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;UserZoom offers different versions of finding usability problems: remote or in the lab, moderated or unmoderated usability testing.
Something to keep in mind: You will not be able to conduct interviews on UXCam because it gathers and observes real-usage data. Instead of testing the usability, you get to see how good it actually is.
In-person user testing: This type of testing can only be used when participants use your devices in the lab. It allows you to record everything on the devices without the need for complicated equipment or further software.
During moderated remote testing, participants are observed on interacted with while they complete the tasks for the test. Moderated testing is best for complex tasks that do not have a structured sequence of steps or where a more interaction and questioning will benefit testing.
During un-moderated remote testing, participants independently complete testing without an interaction with the test moderator. Un-moderated testing is most effective when you have very specific questions about how people use a user interface for relatively straightforward tasks.
Depending on the technology un-moderated remote usability tests may also allow you to analyze such metrics as task-completion rate, time on task, time on page, clickstream paths, satisfaction ratings or opinion rankings, web analytics data (such as browser, operating system, and screen resolution).
The right user testing software will help deliver the best user experience. You may think you've designed a great UI and delivered a great UX, but how will you know until it has been properly tested? It's at the testing stage where you will find out why visitors may not be converting into regular users or customers. And when you will find out which tweaks will need to be made to enhance the overall user experience.
The process of user testing could be extremely time-consuming, especially if you decide to set up your own testing lab. Luckily, there is plenty of user testing software and tools to monitor user behaviour and gather important feedback so you can iron out any issues and transform your design into a more productive offering. You can get some help avoiding common mistakes in our get the perfect website layout (opens in new tab) post.
The last time I participated in formal usability testing was at a fancy lab in Colorado, custom built for the purpose at a cost of around $100,000. It was basically a television studio, complete with one-way glass, lots of special video gear, and a giant video console that would have been adequate to broadcast the Superbowl. To do usability testing for Juno, a group of us flew out to Colorado, rented cars, stayed in a hotel, ate at expensive restaurants, and generally consumed massive amounts of money so we could watch people try to sign up for our online service, and, generally, succeed. 2ff7e9595c
Comments