Relying on WCAG isn't enough to ensure accessibility. Conducting usability testing with disabled users is the only way. And is required by regulations such as the European Accessibility Act.

UX Lead with 10+ years in product design, interaction design, and heuristics audits. Available for freelance projects and consulting.

Get user insights fast, early, and often so you can make data-informed product and design decisions.

Discover proven user testing strategies—from heatmaps to A/B testing—that help you understand user behavior and improve website performance.

Join our workshop focused on redesigning usability testing environments and enhancing UI/UX knowledge with hands-on tips for professionals.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent problem causing substantial personal and societal burden. Though there are specific types of LBP, each with evidence-based treatment recommendations, most patients receive a nonspecific diagnosis which…

Eduard Kuric discusses the significance and role of context in the creation of relevant follow-up questions for unmoderated usability testing, how an AI tasked with interactive follow-up should be validated for its capability to incorporate such context, and what the potential — along with the risks — of AI interaction in usability testing.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are widely used in oncology but can cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be severe or life-threatening if not detected early. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems may facilitate timely recognition and management of irAEs. #usability testing is a critical stage in ePRO system development, yet no published examples of formal #usability and acceptance testing exist. Objective: This study aims to assess the #usability and acceptance of a co-designed ePRO symptom monitoring prototype for irAEs embedded within the Epic electronic medical record. Methods: Testing was conducted at an Australian quaternary #Cancer center. Eligible participants were patients who had received or were receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, their caregivers, or clinicians (oncologists and nurse specialists). Participants completed baseline digital literacy assessments (16-item Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire [MDPQ-16] and 12-item Computer Proficiency Questionnaire [CPQ-12]) before a structured testing session. Each session involved role-specific tasks using the patient-facing Health Hub or the clinician-facing Epic electronic medical record. #usability was assessed using the System #usability Scale (SUS). Acceptance was assessed using a customized Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) questionnaire. Semistructured interviews were used to capture qualitative feedback. Results: A total of 30 participants (7 patients, 3 caregivers, 10 oncologists, and 10 nurse specialists) completed 10 testing sessions. Median MDPQ-16 and CPQ-12 scores were higher for clinicians compared to patients and caregivers. Median SUS scores indicated high #usability—patients and caregivers: 77.5% (IQR 70.0%‐86.3%), oncologists: 82.5% (IQR 80.0%‐90.0%), and nurse specialists: 80.0% (IQR 75.6%‐94.4%). Median UTAUT scores demonstrated strong user acceptance—patients or caregivers: 4.27 (IQR 4.09‐4.58), oncologists: 4.33 (IQR 4‐4.63), and nurse specialists: 4.23 (IQR 3.87‐4.57). Health Hub #usability themes highlighted overall ease of navigation and efficiency of reporting, but a need for clearer survey navigation, simplification of the actions page, and improved organization of trend graphs. For clinicians, themes included efficient side effect capture and intuitive system design, but a need to improve navigation to results, optimize data display, and facilitate team-based alert management. Health Hub acceptance themes highlighted patient empowerment to self-manage, enhanced patient-clinician communication, and reinforcement of existing care. However, concerns were raised about digital equity for vulnerable groups. Clinicians reported that the system streamlined side effect management between visits, aligned with existing Epic workflows, and could be tailored to personal preferences. Concerns remained regarding additional workload and medico-legal responsibilities associated with real-time alerts. Conclusions: The ePRO prototype demonstrated high levels of #usability and acceptance across patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Limitations around navigation and data visualization, alongside equity and workload concerns, will guide refinements prior to implementation. These findings emphasize the value of rigorous formative #usability and acceptance testing to optimize ePRO systems prior to deployment in routine #Cancer care.

Make sure every usability test goes off without a hitch. We’ve built a robust checklist to ensure you’re prepared for everything prior, during, and after…

Background: The development of a medical device requires strict adherence to regulatory processes. Prehabilitation in this context is a new area in surgery that trains, coaches, and advises patients in mental well-being, nutrition, and physical activity.…

Background: Canada’s legalization of recreational cannabis use (CU) has further highlighted the need for innovative interventions that promote lower-risk CU. Young adults aged 18-25 years represent the age group with the highest prevalence of CU. Protective behavioral strategies (PBSs) have been shown to help manage CU and reduce its negative consequences. To date, only a few interventions have focused on PBSs. To address this gap, a mobile app prototype using PBSs to influence CU was developed with and for young adults. Objective: This study aims to describe the development process and #usability testing of Joint Effort, a CU self-management mobile app prototype centered on promoting the use of PBSs among young adults with any past 30-day CU. Methods: Intervention mapping (IM) and a co-design approach were used. Six steps were followed: (1) focus groups were conducted to identify needs and preferences regarding CU interventions; (2) a matrix of change objectives was used to select target behaviors and determinants; (3) theory-based intervention methods and practical applications were selected; (4) focus groups were held to validate the intervention structure and examples of tailored messages; (5) preliminary intervention content was created; and (6) the intervention content was transposed into a mobile app prototype. #usability was assessed through qualitative semistructured interviews and the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS), completed by a sample of 20 university students with a mean age of 21.8 (median 22) years, 14 (70%) of whom were women and 15 (75%) were undergraduates. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Four themes were identified from the interviews: Joint Effort was visually pleasing and easy to use; the content was well-adapted to the target audience and nonjudgmental; customization functions were appreciated; and the app was perceived as helpful and relevant for initiating behavior change. The prototype received a mean quality score of 4.43/5.0 (SD 0.53) per item on the uMARS. The mean scores on the 5 subscales were as follows: engagement (4.14, SD 0.53), functionality (4.60, SD 0.47), aesthetics (4.53, SD 0.52), information quality (4.44, SD 0.61), and subjective quality (3.36, SD 0.53). Conclusions: Our findings highlight the added value of IM and a co-design approach, underscoring the importance of incorporating user feedback in the development of mobile apps. Building on the strong #usability results, the Joint Effort prototype has since been developed into an iOS mobile app, and larger-scale evaluations are currently underway to assess its acceptability, #feasibility, and efficacy.

Get user insights fast, early, and often so you can make data-informed product and design decisions.