The key prerequisite for experience-driven design is to define what experience to design for. User experience (UX) goals concretise the intended experience. Based on our own case studies from industrial environments and a literature study, we propose five different approaches to acquiring insight and inspiration for UX goal setting: Brand, Theory, Empathy, Technology, and Vision. Each approach brings in a different viewpoint, thus supporting the multidisciplinary character of UX. The Brand approach ensures that the UX goals are in line with the company's brand promise. The Theory approach utilises the available scientific knowledge of human behaviour. The Empathy approach focuses on knowing the actual users and stepping into their shoes. The Technology approach considers the new technologies that are being introduced and their positive or negative influence on UX. Finally, the Vision approach focuses on renewal, introducing new kinds of UXs. In the design of industrial systems, several stakeholders are involved and they should share common design goals. Using the different UX goal-setting approaches together brings in the viewpoints of different stakeholders, thus committing them to UX goal setting and emphasising UX as a strategic design decision.

No abstract

No abstract

Aim: Currently, the only metabolic disorder that newborns are screened for in Finland is congenital hypothyroidism. A proposal to start a pilot study on screening for other rare metabolic diseases using tandem mass spectrometry prompted a health technology assessment project on the effect and costs of expanded newborn screening programme options. Method: A modelling study using data from current published studies, healthcare registers and expert opinion. Results: The annual running cost of screening 56 000 newborns for the chosen five disorders (congenital adrenal hyperplasia, medium‐chain acyl‐CoA dehydrogenase deficiency [MCADD], long chain 3‐hydroxyacyl‐CoA dehydrogenase deficiency [LCHADD], phenylketonuria [PKU] and glutaric aciduria type 1 [GA 1]) was estimated to be €2.5 million or €45 per newborn when starting costs were included. The costs per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained are a maximum of €25 500. Prevention of severe handicap in one newborn would reduce the costs to a maximum of €18 000 per QALY gained. Conclusions: Expanding the Finnish neonatal screening programme would require a new organization. The cost‐effectiveness, resources, ethics and equity need to be considered when deciding in favour of or against starting a new screening programme.

Expanding the Finnish neonatal screening programme would require a new organization. The cost-effectiveness, resources, ethics and equity need to be considered when deciding in favour of or against starting a new screening programme.