A grounded procedure for managing data and sample size of a home medical device assessment

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 8004 LNCS, Issue PART 1, 2013, Pages 166-175

  Borsci, Simone ^a   Martin, Jennifer L ^b   Barnett, Julie ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

discovery likelihood; medical device; sample size; usability testing

Indexed keywords

DISCOVERY LIKELIHOOD; ESTIMATION MODELS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION (HCI); INTERACTION PROBLEMS; MEDICAL DEVICES; SAMPLE SIZES; USABILITY ASSESSMENT; USABILITY TESTING;

BENCHMARKING; DAMAGE DETECTION; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

BIOMEDICAL EQUIPMENT;

EID: 84880660159     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-39232-0_19     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Streitz, N.: From cognitive compatibility to the disappearing computer: experience design for smart environments. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics: the Ergonomics of Cool Interaction, pp. 1-2. ACM, Funchal (2008)
2. Soylu, A., Causmaecker, P.D., Desmet, P.: Context and Adaptivity in Pervasive Computing Environments: Links with Software Engineering and Ontological Engineering. Journal of Software 4, 992-1013 (2009)
3. Herman, W.A., Devey, G.B.: Future Trends in Medical Device Technologies: A Ten-Year Forecast. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (2011)
4. IEC: IEC 62366: 2007 Medical devices - Application of usability engineering to medical devices. CEN, Brussels, BE (2007)
5. ISO: ISO 14971:2000 Medical devices - Application of risk management to medical devices. CEN, Brussels, BE (2000)
6. ISO: ISO 13485:2003 Medical devices - Quality management systems - Requirements for regulatory purposes. CEN, Brussels, BE (2003)
7. ISO: ISO 14971:2007 Medical devices - Application of risk management to medical devices. CEN, Brussels, BE (2007)
8. ISO: ISO 15223-1:2012 Medical devices - Symbols to be used with medical device labels, labelling and information to be supplied - Part 1: General requirements. CEN, Brussels, BE (2012)
9. ANSI/AAMI: HE75: Human factors engineering-Design of medical devices. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Arlington, VA (2009)
10. Martin, J., Norris, B.J., Murphy, E., Crowe, J.A.: Medical device development: The challenge for ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics 39, 271-283 (2008)
11. Money, A., Barnett, J., Kuljis, J., Craven, M., Martin, J., Young, T.: The role of the user within the medical device design and development process: medical device manufacturers' perspectives. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 11, 15 (2011)
12. Martin, J., Barnett, J.: Integrating the results of user research into medical device development: insights from a case study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 12, 74 (2012)
13. Heneghan, C., Thompson, M., Billingsley, M., Cohen, D.: Medical-device recalls in the UK and the device-regulation process: retrospective review of safety notices and alerts. BMJ Open 1 (2011)
14. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff - Applying Human Factors and Usability Engineering to Optimize Medical Device Design. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD (2011)
15. Faulkner, L.: Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods 35, 379-383 (2003)
16. Nielsen, J.: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html
17. Nielsen, J.: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/number-of-test-users.html
18. Nielsen, J., Landauer, T.K.: A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: Proceedings of the INTERACT 1993 and CHI 1993 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 206-213. ACM, Amsterdam (1993)
19. Virzi, R.A.: Streamlining the Design Process: Running Fewer Subjects. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting, vol. 34, pp. 291-294. ACM, Santa Monica (1990)
20. Virzi, R.A.: Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Human Factors 34, 457-468 (1992)
21. Borsci, S., Londei, A., Federici, S.: The Bootstrap Discovery Behaviour (BDB): a new outlook on usability evaluation. Cognitive Processing 12, 23-31 (2011)
22. Caulton, D.A.: Relaxing the homogeneity assumption in usability testing. Behaviour & Information Technology 20, 1-7 (2001)
23. Lewis, J.R.: Evaluation of Procedures for Adjusting Problem-Discovery Rates Estimated From Small Samples. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 13, 445-479 (2001)
24. Schmettow, M.: Heterogeneity in the usability evaluation process. In: Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction, vol. 1, pp. 89-98. British Computer Society, Liverpool (2008)
25. Schmettow, M.: Sample size in usability studies. Communications of the ACM 55, 64-70 (2012)
26. Turner, C.W., Lewis, J.R., Nielsen, J.: Determining Usability Test Sample Size. In: Karwowski, W. (ed.) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors, vol. 2, pp. 3084-3088. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2006)
27. Lewis, J.R.: Validation of Monte Carlo estimation of problem discovery likelihood (Tech. Rep. No. 29.3357). IBM (2000)
28. Borsci, S., Macredie, R.D., Barnett, J., Martin, J., Kuljis, J., Young, T.: Reviewing and Extending the Five-user Assumption: A Grounded Procedure for Interaction Evaluation (manuscript submitted for publication, 2013)