Cited by 57Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsUsability and User Interface DesignDigital Mental Health Interventions

Creating an mHealth App for Colorectal Cancer Screening: User-Centered Design Approach

Open access
Griffin, Lauren, Lee, Donghee, Jaisle, Alyssa, Carek, Peter, George, Thomas, Laber, Eric, Lok, Benjamin, Modave, François +2 more·2019·JMIR Human Factors

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients are increasingly using mobile health (mHealth) apps to monitor their health and educate themselves about medical issues. Despite the increasing popularity of such apps, poor design and usability often lead to suboptimal continued use of these apps and subsequently to poor adherence to the behavior changes at which they are aimed. One solution to these design problems is for app developers to use user-centered design (UCD) principles to consider the context and needs of users during the development process. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to present a case study on the design and development process for an mHealth app that uses virtual human technology (VHT) to encourage colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among patients aged 50 years and above. METHODS: We have first provided an overview of the project and discussed its utilization of VHT. We have then reviewed UCD principles and how they can be incorporated into the development of health apps. We have described how we used UCD processes during the app's development. We have then discussed the unique roles played by communication researchers, computer scientists, clinicians, and community participants in creating an mHealth app that is credible, usable, effective, and accessible to its target audience. RESULTS: The principles of UCD were woven throughout the project development, with researchers collecting feedback from patients and providers at all stages and using that feedback to improve the credibility, usability, effectiveness, and accessibility of the mHealth app. The app was designed in an iterative process, which encouraged feedback and improvement of the app and allowed teams from different fields to revisit topics and troubleshoot problems. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a UCD process contributed to the development of an app, which not only reflected cross-disciplinary expertise but also the needs, wants, and concerns of patients.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/12700

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The UCD iterative process creates highly engaging and effective mHealth apps, requiring collaboration between end users, content experts, and user experience (UX) designers.

    “This iterative process creates highly engaging and effective mHealth apps, requiring collaboration between end users, content experts, and user experience (UX) designers [23,24].”

    From Co-Designing the MOSAIC mHealth App With Breast Cancer Survivors: User-Centered Design Approach (2024) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Introduction (User-Centered Design) describes UCD as an iterative, multidisciplinary process incorporating user feedback, and the Discussion (Principal Findings) describes interrelated roles for community participants, clinicians, communication scientists, and computer scientists. But the paper does not establish that the process creates highly engaging apps; its Discussion (Effectiveness) says behavioral-effectiveness data were still pending and offers only preliminary focus-group evidence. The collaboration described in this project also does not establish that this exact set of roles is required for all mHealth apps. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • As UCD sessions progress, UX designers bring simple prototype sketches to the team of users and content experts for continued evaluation, refinement, and further iteration.

    “As the sessions progress, the UX designers bring simple prototype sketches to the team of users and content experts for continued evaluation, refinement, and further iteration [19,21,24].”

    From Co-Designing the MOSAIC mHealth App With Breast Cancer Survivors: User-Centered Design Approach (2024) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Introduction (User-Centered Design; page unavailable) describes iterative prototype testing that incorporates user feedback. The Results (Phase 2: Prototype Development; page unavailable) describe a working app prototype tested by users, not simple sketches brought by UX designers to users and content experts. The specific sketch-based workflow is therefore unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [39]Zhou S Bickmore T Paasche-Orlow M Jack B Agent-User Concordance and Satisfaction with a Virtual Hospital Discharge Nurse Intelligent Virtual Agents 2014 International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents August 27-29 Boston, MA Springer International Publishing 528 541

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Griffin, L., Lee, D., Jaisle, A., Carek, P., George, T., Laber, E., Lok, B., Modave, F., Paskett, E., & Krieger, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Griffin, Lauren
Venue
JMIR Human Factors
Published
2019-05-08
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
e12700
ISSN
2292-9495 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2930205843
Cited by
57
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
9.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Human Factors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA207689)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK108073)
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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile health apps, colorectal cancer screening, user-centered design, app usability, patient feedback, interdisciplinary collaboration, older adults, health behavior change

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