Cited by 152Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

USEQ: A Short Questionnaire for Satisfaction Evaluation of Virtual Rehabilitation Systems

Open access
Gil-Gómez, José-Antonio, Manzano-Hernández, Pilar, Albiol-Pérez, Sergio, Aula-Valero, Carmen, Gil-Gómez, Hermenegildo, Lozano-Quilis, José-Antonio·2017·Sensors

Abstract

New emerging technologies have proven their efficacy in aiding people in their rehabilitation. The tests that are usually used to evaluate usability (in general) or user satisfaction (in particular) of this technology are not specifically focused on virtual rehabilitation and patients. The objective of this contribution is to present and evaluate the USEQ (User Satisfaction Evaluation Questionnaire). The USEQ is a questionnaire that is designed to properly evaluate the satisfaction of the user (which constitutes part of usability) in virtual rehabilitation systems. Forty patients with balance disorders completed the USEQ after their first session with ABAR (Active Balance Rehabilitation), which is a virtual rehabilitation system that is designed for the rehabilitation of balance disorders. Internal consistency analysis and exploratory factor analysis were carried out to identify the factor structure of the USEQ. The six items of USEQ were significantly associated with each other, and the Cronbach alpha coefficient for the questionnaire was 0.716. In an analysis of the principal components, a one-factor solution was considered to be appropriate. The findings of the study suggest that the USEQ is a reliable questionnaire with adequate internal consistency. With regard to patient perception, the patients found the USEQ to be an easy-to-understand questionnaire with a convenient number of questions.

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 · 10.3390/s17071589

Cites

48 of 48 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?

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

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [1]Nielsen J. Usability Engineering Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. San Francisco, CA, USA 2008
  2. [39]Gil-Gómez J.A. Manzano-Hernández P. Albiol-Pérez S. Aula-Valero C. Gil-Gómez H. Lozano-Quilis J.A. SEQ: Suitability evaluation questionnaire for virtual rehabilitation systems. Application in a virtual rehabilitation system for balance rehabilitation Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare Venice, Italy 5–8 May 2013 335 338

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gil-Gómez, J.-A., Manzano-Hernández, P., Albiol-Pérez, S., Aula-Valero, C., Gil-Gómez, H., & Lozano-Quilis, J.-A.
Affiliations
  • Instituto Universitario de Automática e Informática Industrial, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain
  • Hospital S. José, Av. Zaragoza 16, 44001 Teruel, Spain
  • Universidad de Zaragoza (ES)
  • Universitat Politècnica de València (ES)
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2017-07-07
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
1589
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2725088392
Cited by
150
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4
FWCI
7.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • RiuNet (Universitat Politècnica de València) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Zaguan (University of Zaragoza Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
virtual rehabilitation, usability evaluation, balance disorders, questionnaire development, factor structure, internal consistency, patient perspectives
MeSH terms
Telerehabilitation, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, Personal Satisfaction, Surveys and Questionnaires, User-Computer Interface, Patient Satisfaction

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