Assessing Web interaction with recollection: Age-related and task-related differences

Etcheverry, Isabelle; Terrier, Patrice; Marquié, Jean-Claude

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.004

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, a website’s search method should be visually clear with specific instructions and few required steps [ 28 ]. As seen in previous research [ 94 ], our users were better at finding actual content (eg, locating a specific Evidence Summary or Web Resource Rating) than finding navigation tools (eg, locating the search box).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…Query analysis research has shown that when people enter short queries into search engines for health information, it often leads to disappointment in the search results due to misrepresentation of the health problem [ 97 ] and an abundance of unwanted hits. Also, more than half of online seekers will not go beyond the first page of the search results [ 94 , 98 ]. This experience with using search engines may explain why our participants entered long queries (ie, more than three terms per query) into the Portal search box.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The McMaster Optimal Aging Portal: Usability Evaluation of a Unique Evidence-Based Health Information Website

Barbara¹,

Dobbins²,

Iorio³

et al. 2016

JMIR Human Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIncreasingly, older adults and their informal caregivers are using the Internet to search for health-related information. There is a proliferation of health information online, but the quality of this information varies, often based on exaggerated or dramatic findings, and not easily comprehended by consumers. The McMaster Optimal Aging Portal (Portal) was developed to provide Internet users with high-quality evidence about aging and address some of these current limitations of health information posted online. The Portal includes content for health professionals coming from three best-in-class resources (MacPLUS, Health Evidence, and Health Systems Evidence) and four types of content specifically prepared for the general public (Evidence Summaries, Web Resource Ratings, Blog Posts, and Twitter messages).ObjectiveOur objectives were to share the findings of the usability evaluation of the Portal with particular focus on the content features for the general public and to inform designers of health information websites and online resources for older adults about key usability themes.MethodsData analysis included task performance during usability testing and qualitative content analyses of both the usability sessions and interviews to identify core themes.ResultsA total of 37 participants took part in 33 usability testing sessions and 21 focused interviews. Qualitative analysis revealed common themes regarding the Portal’s strengths and challenges to usability. The strengths of the website were related to credibility, applicability, browsing function, design, and accessibility. The usability challenges included reluctance to register, process of registering, searching, terminology, and technical features.ConclusionsThe study reinforced the importance of including end users during the development of this unique, dynamic, evidence-based health information website. The feedback was applied to iteratively improve website usability. Our findings can be applied by designers of health-related websites.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%