Cited by 12Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsCancer survivorship and careUsability and User Interface Design

Usability and acceptance evaluation of ACESO: a Web-based breast cancer survivorship tool

Kapoor, Akshat, Nambisan, Priya·2018·Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract

Purpose The specific objective of this research is to design and develop a personalized Web application to support breast cancer survivors after treatment, as they deal with post-treatment challenges, such as comorbidities and side effects of treatment.Methodology A mixed-methods approach, utilizing a combination of think-aloud analysis, personal interviews, and surveys, was adopted for user acceptance and usability testing among a group of breast cancer survivors. User feedback was gathered on their perceived value of the application, and any user-interface issues that may hinder the overall usability were identified.Results The application's portability and capability of organizing their entire breast cancer-related medical history as well as tracking various quality of life indicators were perceived to be valuable features. The application had an overall high usability; however, certain sections of the application were not as intuitive to locate. Visual elements of the website were appreciated; however, overall experience would benefit from incorporating more sociable elements that exhibit positive re-enforcement within the end user and provide a friendlier experience.Conclusion The results of the study showcase the need for more personalized tools and resources to support survivors in self-management. It also demonstrates the ability to integrate breast cancer survivorship care plans from diverse providers and paves the way to add further value-added features in consumer health applications, such as personal decision support.Implications for cancer survivors Using a personal decision support-based tool can serve as a training tool and resource, providing these patients with pertinent information about the various aspects of their long-term health, while educating them about any related side effects and symptoms. It is hoped that making such tools more accessible could help in engaging survivors to play an active role in managing their health and encourage shared decision-making with their providers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11764-017-0670-8

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous research suggests that single-page websites or apps with properly labeled interactions and different color depths, familiar icons, and images are more usable and acceptable to cancer survivors.

    “Previous research has yielded comparable results [64,65,69-71], suggesting that single-page websites or apps that enable properly labeled interactions and make use of different color depths, familiar icons, and images are more usable and acceptable to cancer survivors.”
  • Survivors valued access to ubiquitous evidence-based self-care information organized according to the cancer continuum, considering it could help them better manage and cope with their condition and problems.

    “Similar to previous research [64-66], survivors valued having access to ubiquitous evidence-based self-care information that was organized in accordance with the cancer continuum, considering that it could help them better manage and cope with their condition and problems.”
  • These findings echo many limitations and development requirements gathered in previous research aimed at developing digital programs for supporting cancer survivors.

    “These findings echo many of the limitations and development requirements gathered in previous research aimed at developing digital programs for supporting cancer survivors [64,65,68-73].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kapoor, A., & Nambisan, P.
Affiliations
  • East Carolina University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
Corresponding author
  • Kapoor, Akshat
  • Nambisan, Priya
Venue
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published
2018-01-25
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
316-325
ISSN
  • 1932-2259 (ISSN-L)
  • 1932-2267
OpenAlex
W2786902478
Cited by
12
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cancer Survivorship (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, web-based health application, usability evaluation, user acceptance, survivorship care, self-management, treatment side effects, comorbidities, shared decision-making, patient-provider communication, health information organization
MeSH terms
Psychosocial Support Systems, Cancer Survivors, Survivorship, Adult, Aftercare, Breast Neoplasms, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review