Influence of Patient Characteristics and Psychological Needs on Diabetes Mobile App Usability in Adults With Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes: Crossover Randomized Trial
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
BACKGROUND: More than 1100 diabetes mobile apps are available, but app usage by patients is low. App usability may be influenced by patient factors such as age, sex, and psychological needs. OBJECTIVE: Guided by Self-Determination Theory, the purposes of this study were to (1) assess the effect of patient characteristics on app usability, and (2) determine whether patient characteristics and psychological needs (competence, autonomy, and connectivity)-important for motivation in diabetes care-are associated with app usability. METHODS: Using a crossover randomized design, 92 adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes tested two Android apps (mySugr and OnTrack) for seven tasks including data entry, blood glucose (BG) reporting, and data sharing. We used multivariable linear regression models to examine associations between patient characteristics, psychological needs, user satisfaction, and user performance (task time, success, and accuracy). RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 54 (range 19-74) years, and were predominantly white (62%, 57/92), female (59%, 54/92), with type 2 diabetes (70%, 64/92), and had education beyond high school (67%, 61/92). Participants rated an overall user satisfaction score of 62 (SD 18), which is considered marginally acceptable. The satisfaction mean score for each app was 55 (SD 18) for mySugr and 68 (SD 15) for OnTrack. The mean task completion time for all seven tasks was 7 minutes, with a mean task success of 82% and an accuracy rate of 68%. Higher user satisfaction was observed for patients with less education (P=.04) and those reporting more competence (P=.02), autonomy (P=.006), or connectivity with a health care provider (P=.03). User performance was associated with age, sex, education, diabetes duration, and autonomy. Older patients required more time (95% CI 1.1-3.2) and had less successful task completion (95% CI 3.5-14.3%). Men needed more time (P=.01) and more technical support than women (P=.04). High school education or less was associated with lower task success (P=.003). Diabetes duration of ≥10 years was associated with lower task accuracy (P=.02). Patients who desired greater autonomy and were interested in learning their patterns of BG and carbohydrates had greater task success (P=.049). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes app usability was associated with psychological needs that are important for motivation. To enhance patient motivation to use diabetes apps for self-management, clinicians should address competence, autonomy, and connectivity by teaching BG pattern recognition and lifestyle planning, customizing BG targets, and reviewing home-monitored data via email. App usability could be improved for older male users and those with less education and greater diabetes duration by tailoring app training and providing ongoing technical support.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
User compliance is closely linked to clinical outcomes for mHealth apps designed to stimulate behavior change.
“Such studies are particularly important for mHealth apps that are designed to stimulate behavior change because user compliance is closely linked to clinical outcomes.”
From What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients? (2020) · cites this paper as [35]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 27,815 · see citing works
An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale
Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447310802205776 · Cited by 5,181 · see citing works
mediation : R Package for Causal Mediation Analysis
Tingley, D. H., Yamamoto, T., Hirose, K., Keele, L. J., & Imai, K. (2014) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v059.i05 · Cited by 4,216 · see citing works
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x · Cited by 1,642 · see citing works
The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale
Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. (2009) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_12 · Cited by 1,278 · see citing works
Fong, D. S., Aiello, L. P., Gardner, T. W., King, G. L., Blankenship, G. W., Cavallerano, J. D., Ferris, F. L., & Klein, R. (2004) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.27.2007.s84 · Cited by 1,138 · see citing works
Supporting Autonomy to Motivate Patients With Diabetes for Glucose Control
Williams, G. C., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (1998) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.21.10.1644 · Cited by 1,129 · see citing works
Health behavior models in the age of mobile interventions: are our theories up to the task?
Riley, W. T., Rivera, D. E., Atienza, A. A., Nilsen, W., Allison, S. M., & Mermelstein, R. (2011) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s13142-011-0021-7 · Cited by 978 · see citing works
Levesque, C. S., Williams, G. C., Elliot, D. L., Pickering, M. A., Bodenhamer, B., & Finley, P. J. (2006) · Health Education Research · doi:10.1093/her/cyl148 · Cited by 666 · see citing works
Quinn, C. C., Shardell, M. D., Terrin, M. L., Barr, E. A., Ballew, S. H., & Gruber-Baldini, A. L. (2011) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc11-0366 · Cited by 650 · see citing works
Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Zeldman, A., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (2004) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.23.1.58 · Cited by 590 · see citing works
Jaiswal, M., Divers, J., Dabelea, D., Isom, S., Bell, R. A., Martin, C. L., Pettitt, D. J., Saydah, S., Pihoker, C., Standiford, D. A., et al. (2017) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc17-0179 · Cited by 303 · see citing works
Usability of Commercially Available Mobile Applications for Diverse Patients
Sarkar, U., Gourley, G. I., Lyles, C. R., Tieu, L., Clarity, C., Newmark, L., Singh, K., & Bates, D. W. (2016) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-016-3771-6 · Cited by 257 · see citing works
DialBetics: A Novel Smartphone-based Self-management Support System for Type 2 Diabetes Patients
Waki, K., Fujita, H., Uchimura, Y., Omae, K., Aramaki, E., Kato, S., Lee, H., Kobayashi, H., Kadowaki, T., & Ohe, K. (2014) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/1932296814526495 · Cited by 203 · see citing works
Georgsson, M., & Staggers, N. (2016) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocv099 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Orsama, A.-L., Lähteenmäki, J., Harno, K., Kulju, M., Wintergerst, E., Schachner, H., Stenger, P., Leppänen, J., Kaijanranta, H., Salaspuro, V., et al. (2013) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2013.0056 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
mHealth applications for diabetes: user preference and implications for app development
Conway, N., Campbell, I., Forbes, P., Cunningham, S., & Wake, D. (2016) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/1460458215616265 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Peng, W., Yuan, S., & Holtz, B. E. (2016) · Telemedicine and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2015.0180 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Trends in Health Care Expenditure in U.S. Adults With Diabetes: 2002–2011
Ozieh, M. N., Bishu, K. G., Dismuke, C. E., & Egede, L. E. (2015) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc15-0369 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Graffigna, G., Barello, S., Bonanomi, A. G., & Menichetti, J. (2016) · Journal of Diabetes Research · doi:10.1155/2016/2974521 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Nouwen, A., Ford, T. E., Balan, A. T., Twisk, J. W. R., Ruggiero, L., & White, D. (2011) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0024500 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
American Diabetes Association (2015) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc16-s013 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Support for diabetes using technology: a pilot study to improve self-management.
Hunt, C. W., Sanderson, B., & Ellison, K. J. (2014) · PubMed · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Padhye, N. S., & Wang, J. (2015) · doi:10.1109/embc.2015.7320159 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Design Implications of User Experience Studies: The Case of a Diabetes Wellness App
Tulu, B., Strong, D. M., Lei, W., He, Q., Agu, E., Pedersen, P. C., & Djamasbi, S. (2016) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2016.434 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Usability study of mobile social networking system among Saudi Type 2 diabetes patients (SANAD)
Alanzi, T. M., Istepanian, R. S. H., & Philip, N. Y. (2014) · Middle East Conference on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/mecbme.2014.6783263 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [2]American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2016 Diabetes Care 2016 12 39 9 S1 S109 10.2337/dc16-er09 27555625 39/9/1653 26696671 · DOI
- [8]Barum CM Preparing for usability testing Usability Testing Essentials Ready, Set...Test! 2011 Burlington, MA Elsevier 181 185
Cited by
Sorted by citations
What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients?
Rowland, S. P., Fitzgerald, J. E., Holme, T., Powell, J., & McGregor, A. (2020) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-019-0206-x · Cited by 454 · see citing works
Fu, H. N. C., Wyman, J. F., Peden-McAlpine, C. J., Draucker, C. B., Schleyer, T., & Adam, T. J. (2023) · JMIR Diabetes · doi:10.2196/38592 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Fu, H. N., Adam, T. J., Konstan, J. A., Wolfson, J. A., Clancy, T. R., & Wyman, J. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Corresponding author
- Fu, Helen NC
- Venue
- JMIR Diabetes
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2019-04-30
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e11462
- ISSN
- 2371-4379 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6660121
- OpenAlex
- W2912456748
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 7.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- JMIR Diabetes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
- Sigma Theta Tau International
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
- Keywords
- app usability, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, self-determination theory, psychological needs, competence, autonomy, connectivity, user satisfaction, blood glucose monitoring, diabetes self-management, educational attainment, age and sex differences, diabetes duration, task performance, user motivation, health technology adoption, patient characteristics
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
