Method for technology-delivered healthcare measures

CIN - Computers Informatics Nursing

Volumn 29, Issue 12, 2011, Pages 730-740

  Kramer Jackman, Kelli Lee ^a   Popkess Vawter, Sue ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer systems; Questionnaires; Reproducibility of results; User computer interface

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONSUMER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMANS; INTERNET; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 84655167734     PISSN: 15382931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/NCN.0b013e318224b581     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Naglieri J, Drasgow F, Handler L, Prifitera A,Margolis A, Velasquez R. Psychological testing on the internet: New problems, old issues. Report to American Psychological Association. 2002. http://www. apa.org/science/programs/ testing/testing-on-internet.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2010.
2. Draugalis J, Coons S, Plaza C. Best practices for survey research reports: A synopsis for authors and reviewers. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;15:72(1). Article 11. http://www.ajpe.org/view.asp?art= aj7308142&pdf=yes. Accessed June 17, 2010.
3. Waltz C, StricklandO, Lenz E.Measurement in Nursing and Health Research. 4th ed. New York: Springer Publishing Co; 2010.
4. Houston J, Fiore D. Online medical surveys: Using the internet as a research tool. MD Comput. 1998;15:(2):116-119. http://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/9540325. Accessed June 17, 2010.
5. Im E, CheeW. Issues in internet research. Nurs Outlook. 2003;51: 6-12. (Pubitemid 36886668)
6. Kushniruk A, Borycki E. Human, Social, and Organizational Aspects of Health Information Systems. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc; 2008.
7. Eichner J, Dullabh P. Accessible Health Information Technology (Health IT) for Populations With Limited Literacy: A Guide for Developers and Purchasers of Health IT (prepared by the National Opinion Research Center for The National Resource Center for Health IT). AHRQ Publication No. 08-0010-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2007.
8. Gentry T, Wallace J, Kyarfordt C, Lynch K. Personal digital assistants as cognitive aids for individuals with sever traumatic brain injury: A community-based trial. Brain Inj. 2008;22:19-24.
9. Huang I, Sugden D, Beveridge S. Assistive devices and cerebral palsy: Factors influencing the use of assistive devices at home by children with cerebral palsy. Child Health Dev. 2009;35:130-139.
10. Jones R. The role of health kiosks in 2009: Literature and informant review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2009;6:1818-1855.
11. MorFnM, Luque J, Botella A, Cuberos E, Casilari E, D.
12. Tufano J, Karras B. Mobile e-Health interventions for obesity: A timely opportunity to leverage convergence trends. J Med Internet Res. 2007;7:e58.
13. Ahern D, Kreslake J, Phalen J.What is eHealth: Perspectives on the evolution of eHealth research.J Med Internet Res. 2006;8(1):e4.
14. Eng T. The eHealth Landscape: A Terrain Map of Emerging Information and Communication Technologies in Health and Health Care. Princeton, NJ: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. 2001. http://www.jmir.org/2006/1/e4/. Accessed June 17, 2010.
15. Pew Research Center Publications. E-Patients: Chronically ill seek health information online. 2008. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/938/ e-patients- chronically-ill-seek-health-information-online. Accessed June 17, 2010.
16. US Department of Heath and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP). Communicating Health: Priorities and Strategies for Progress: Action Plans to Achieve the Health Communication Objectives in Healthy People 2010. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office; 2003. http:// odphp.osophs.dhhs.gov/projects/HealthComm/default.htm. Accessed June 17, 2010.
17. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America's Adults: Results From the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). Washington, DC: US Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics; 2006.
18. Walker J, Pepa C, Gerard P. Assessing the health literacy levels of patients using selected hospital services. Clin Nurse Spec. 2010;2(1): 31-37.
19. Nielsen-Bohlman L, Panzer A, Kindig D, eds. Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004.
20. MacCray A. Promoting health literacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12:152-163.
21. Speros C. Health literacy: Concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2005;50: 633-640. (Pubitemid 40828738)
22. Stephens S. All about readability. The Plain Language Initiative. 2000. http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/stephens/readability. html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
23. Reyna V, Nelson W, Han P, Dieckmann N. How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical. Decis Mak Psychol Bull. 2009;19:22.
24. Friedman D, Hoffman-Goetz L. A systematic review of readability and comprehension instruments used for print and Web-based cancer information. Health Educ Behav. 2006;33(3):352-373. (Pubitemid 43725866)
25. Norman C., Skinner H., Protivnik J. Virtual reality therapy as treatment for specific phobia J Technol Couns. N.D. 4 1 http://jtc.colstate.edu/Vol4-1/ Protivnak/Protivnak.htm Accessed June 17, 2010.
26. Norman C, SkinnerH. eHealth literacy: Essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res. 2006;16(8):e9.
27. Brummel-Smith K, DangioloM. Assistive technologies in the home. Clin Geriatr Med. 2009;25:61-77.
28. Protivnik J. Virtual reality therapy as treatment for specific phobia. J Technol Couns. N.D.;4(1). http://jtc.colstate.edu/Vol4-1/Protivnak/ Protivnak.htm. Accessed June 17, 2010.
29. Schneiderman B, Plaisant C. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 2005.
30. Nguyen H, Gill D,Wolpin S, Steele B, Benditt J. Pilot study of a cell phone-based exercise persistence intervention post-rehabilitation for COPD. Int J COPD. 2009;4:301-313. http://www.dovepress.com/ pilot-study-of-a-cell-phone- based-exercise-persistence-interventionpo- peer-reviewed-article-COPD. Accessed June 17, 2010.
31. Kramer K. Psychometric analysis of three tension scales in rural telehealth setting for weight management practice [doctoral dissertation]. 2007;UMI:1-344. http://www.il.proquest.com. Accessed January 17, 2008.
32. Botella C, Martin H, Gracia-Palacios A, Banos R, Perpina C, Alcaniz M. Clinical significant virtual environments for treatment of panic disorder and agoraphobia. Cyber Psychol Behav. 2004;7(5): 527-535. (Pubitemid 39482472)
33. Cupertino A, Richter K, Cox L, et al. Feasibility of a Spanish/English computerized decision aid to facilitate smoking cessation efforts in underserved communities. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2010; 21:504-517.
34. Ryan P, Pumilia N, Henak B, Change T. Development and performance Usability testing of a theory-based, computerized, tailored intervention. Comput Inform Nurs. 2009;27(5):288-298.
35. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute. Research-Based Web Design and Usability Guidelines (update). NIH Publication 03-5424. 2006. http://www.usability. gov/pdfs/guidelines.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
36. Sawaki Y. Comparability of conventional and computerized tests of reading in a second language. Lang Learn Technol. 2001;5(2):38-59. http://llt.msu.edu/ vol5num2/sawaki/default.html. Accessed June 17, 2010. (Pubitemid 38817337)
37. American Psychological Association. Guidelines for Computer- Based Tests and Interpretations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1986.
38. Bannigan K, Watson R. Reliability and validity in a nutshell. J Clin Nurs. 2009;18:3237-3243.
39. Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11(2): 322-333. (Pubitemid 351473608)
40. Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in Nursing and Health Research. 3rd ed. New York: Springer Publishing Co; 2005.
41. Housen P, Shannon G, Simon B, et al. What the resident meant to say: Use of cognitive interviewing techniques to develop questionnaires for nursing how residents. Gerontologist. 2008; 48(2):158-169. http://gerontologist. oxfordjournals.org/content/ 39/1/25.abstract?citedby=yes&legid=geront;39/1/ 25. Accessed June 17, 2010. (Pubitemid 351705981)
42. Satori R. Face validity in personality test: Psychometric instruments and projective techniques in comparison. Qual Quantity. 2009;44: 749-759.
43. SweetRM,Hananel D, Lawrenz F. A unified approach to validation, reliability, and education study design for surgical technical skills training. Arch Surg. 2010;145(2):197-201.
44. Polit D, Beck C, Owen S. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30:459-467.
45. Gable R, Wolf M. Instrument Development in the Affective Domain. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1993.
46. Lynn M. Determination and quantification of content validity. West J Nurs Res. 1986;35:382-385. (Pubitemid 17184381)
47. Tilden V, Nelson C, May B. The IPR Inventory: Development and psychometric characteristics. West J Nurs Res. 1990;39:337-343.
48. Grant J, Davis L. Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Res Nurs Health. 1997;20:269-274.
49. Grant J, Kinney M. Using the Delphi technique to examine the content validity of nursing diagnoses. Nurs Diagn. 1992;3(1):12-22. http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/1562392. Accessed June 17, 2010.
50. D'Alessandro D, Kingsley P, Johnson-West J. The readability of pediatric patient education materials on theWorldWideWeb. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155:807-812. http://archpedi.highwire. org/cgi/content/full/155/7/807. Accessed June 17, 2010. (Pubitemid 32613784)
51. Gottlieb R, Rogers J. Readability of Health Sites on the Internet. Int Electr J Health Educ. 2004;7:38-42. http://www.aahperd.org/ aahe/publications/ iejhe/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=38933. Accessed June 17, 2010.
52. National Institutes of Health. The NIH Plain Language Initiative. http://execsec.od.nih.gov/plainlang/index.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
53. US Department of Health and Human Services. Usability.gov: A guide to developing useful Web sites. 2008. http://usability.gov. Accessed June 17, 2010.
54. Brigham Young University. Raygor Readability Estimate. 2000. http:// english.byu.edu/novelinks/reading%20strategies/Seedfolks% 20HTML%20Text%20FileF/ raygor.html. Accessed June, 17, 2010.
55. Dawson J. How to choose the best readability formula for your document. 2008. http://ezinearticles.com/?How-to-Choose-the- Best-Readability-Formula-for- Your-Document&id=1065366. Accessed June 17, 2010.
56. Pearson P, Barr R, Kamile M, Mosenthal P. Handbook of Reading Research: One of the Most Commonly Used Readability Formulas. Volume 3. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2002.
57. Berland G, Elliott M, Morales L, et al. Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285(20):2612-2621. (Pubitemid 32479901)
58. Huizinga M, Carlisle A, Cavanaugh K, et al. Literacy, numeracy, portion-size estimation skills. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(4):324-328.
59. Jay M, Adams J, Herring S, et al. A randomized trial of a brief multimedia intervention to improve comprehension of food labels. Prev Med. 2009;48:25-31.
60. Rothman R, Housam R, Weiss H, et al. Patient understanding of food labels: The role of literacy and numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2006;31(5):391-397.
61. Galitz W. The Essential Guide to User Interface Design: An Introduction to GUI Design Principles and Techniques. 3rd ed. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley; 2007.
62. US Department of Health and Human Services. Privacy and Security and Health Information Technology (Health IT). 2009. http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ privacy/. Accessed June 17, 2010.
63. Bailey B. Consider as many design alternatives as possible: The value of parallel design. Usability.gov Web site. 2006. http://www. usability.gov/ articles/newsletter/pubs/020106news.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
64. Nielsen J. How to conduct heuristic evaluation. 1996. http://www. useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic-evaluation.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
65. Schneiderman B. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Human-Computer Interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1986.
66. Norman D. The Psychology of Every Day Things. New York: Basic Books. Nova Research Company [Questionnaire Development System]. 1988. http://www. novaresearch.com. Accessed June 17, 2010.
67. Nielsen J. Usability Engineering. Boston, MA: Academic Press Ltd; 1993.
68. Bailey B. Judging the severity of usability issues onWeb sites: This doesn't work. Usability.gov Web site. 2005. http://www.usability. gov/articles/newsletter/pubs/102005news.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
69. Bailey W. Calculating the number of test subjects.Usability.gov Web site. 2000. http://www.webusability.com. Accessed June 17, 2010.
70. Bailey B. Determining the correct number of usability test participants. Usability.gov Web site. 2006. http://www.usability.gov/ articles/newsletter/ pubs/092006news.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
71. Hesse B, Schneiderman B. eHealth research from the user's perspective. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(58):s97-s103. (Pubitemid 46634958)
72. Johnson C. Why did that happen? Exploring the proliferation of barely usable software in healthcare systems. Qual Saf Health Care. 2007;15(S1):i76-i81. (Pubitemid 46009834)
73. Kools M. A focus on the usability of health education materials. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;65:275-276. (Pubitemid 46241785)
74. Shekelle P, Morton S, Keeler E. Costs and Benefits of Health Information Technology: Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 132. Publication 06-E006. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2006. http://www.ahrq.gov/ downloads/pub/evidence/pdf/hitsyscosts/hitsys.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2010.
75. Nielsen J, Coyne K, Tahir M. Make it usable. PC Magazine. 2001. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,33821,00.asp. Accessed June 17, 2010.
76. Beuscart-Zephir M, Brender J, Beuscart R, Menager-Depriester I. Cognitive evaluation: How to assess the usability of information technology in healthcare. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1997;54:19-28. http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/9290916. Accessed June 17, 2010. (Pubitemid 27372116)
77. Pearce G, Williamson J, Harrell J, Wildemuth B, Solomon P. The children's computerized physical activity reporter: Children as partners in the design and usability evaluation of an application for self-reporting physical activity. Comput Inform Nurs. 2007; 25(2):93-105.
78. Stinson J, Petroz G, Tait G, et al. e-Ouch: Usability testing of an electronic chronic pain diary for adolescents with arthritis. Clin J Pain. 2005;22(3):295-305. (Pubitemid 44378553)
79. Ling J, vanSchaik P. The effects of link format and screen location on visual search of Web pages. Ergonomics. 2004;22: 907-921. (Pubitemid 39004130)
80. Boissy P, Jacobs K, Roy S. Usability of a barcode scanning system as a means of data entry on a PDA for self-report health outcome questionnaires: A pilot study in individuals over 60 years of age. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006;6:6-42.
81. Chen Y-C, Chiu H-C, Tsai M-D, Chang H, Chong C-F. Development of a personal digital assistant-based wireless application in clinical practice. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2007;85: 181-184. (Pubitemid 46108130)
82. Edwards S, Slattery M, Murtaugh M, et al. Development and use of touch-screen audio computer-assisted self-interviewing in a study of American Indians. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(11): 1336-1342. (Pubitemid 47234327)
83. Koivunen M, Valimaki M, Pitkanen A. A preliminary usability evaluation of Web-based portal application for patients with schizophrenia. J Psychiatr Mental Health Nurs. 2007;14:462-469.
84. Treadwell I. The usability of personal digital assistants (PDAs) for assessment of practical performance. Med Educ. 2006;40: 855-861. (Pubitemid 44272759)
85. Bailey B. Getting the complete picture with usability testing. Usability.gov. 2006. http://www.usability.gov/articles/newsletter/ pubs/030106news.html. Accessed June 17, 2010.
86. Brooke J. SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. In Jordan P, Weerdmeester B, Thomas A, Mclelland I, eds. Usability Evaluation in Industry. London, UK: Taylor and Francis; 1996:189-194. Ch. 21.
87. Norman K, Schneiderman B. QUIS Web site. http://lap.umd.edu/ quis/. Accessed August 9, 2010.
88. Harper B, Slaughter L, Norman K. Questionnaire Administration Via the WWW: A Validation and Reliability Study for a User Satisfaction Questionnaire. Paper presented at WebNet 97, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Toronto, ON, Canada; 1997.