Which training methods are effective for learning new smartphone memory apps after acquired brain injury? A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing trial and error, systematic instruction and error-based learning

Ramirez-Hernandez, Diana; Wong, Dana; Ownsworth, Tamara; Stolwyk, Renerus J.

doi:10.1080/09602011.2021.1993273

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the majority (19 of 21) of participants who stayed in the study through the baseline phase and attended the intervention session, were capable of learning to use the app in a short session with a video tutorial and app use practice session. This is consistent with recent findings in a pilot RCT comparing different training methods for the Cozi app for people receiving ABI rehabilitation (Ramirez-Hernandez et al, 2021 ). This study found that participants were able to use the app after only a single training session.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…These features include push prompts that ask “Do you need to set any reminders?” and a user interface that breaks the process of setting reminders down into small steps (Jamieson et al, 2015 ; Jamieson et al, 2017 ). While there have been several research papers that have investigated the efficacy of reminding technologies compared to practice as usual or pencil and paper alternatives (Mcdonald et al, 2011 ; Ramirez-Hernandez et al, 2021 ; Wilson et al, 2001 ), the literature lacks comparisons between different technologies or different apps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

AppReminders – a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial of a memory aid app for people with acquired brain injury

Jamieson

McClelland

Goudie

et al. 2023

Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobile phone reminding apps can be used by people with acquired brain injury (ABI) to compensate for memory impairments. This pilot feasibility trial aimed to establish the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing reminder apps in an ABI community treatment setting. Adults with ABI and memory difficulty who completed the three-week baseline were randomized ( n = 29) and allocated to Google Calendar or ApplTree app. Those who attended an intervention session ( n = 21) watched a 30-minute video tutorial of the app then completed reminder setting assignments to ensure they could use the app. Guidance was given if needed from a clinician or researcher. Those who passed the app assignments ( n = 19) completed a three-week follow up. Recruitment was lower than target ( n = 50), retention rate was 65.5%, adherence rate was 73.7%. Qualitative feedback highlighted issues that may impact usability of reminding apps introduced within community brain injury rehabilitation. Feasibility results indicate a full trial would require 72 participants to demonstrate the minimally clinically important efficacy difference between apps, should a difference exist. Most participants (19 of 21) given an app could learn to use it with the short tutorial. Design features implemented in ApplTree have potential to improve the uptake and utility of reminding apps.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

AppReminders – a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial of a memory aid app for people with acquired brain injury

Jamieson

McClelland

Goudie

et al. 2023

Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trial and error learning led to higher proficiency immediately after training compared to a highly structured systematic instruction, and led to better proficiency with the app one week later compared to an error-based learning method. There were no differences between the groups that received different training methods at 6-week follow up [30]. Qualitative findings indicate different advantages of the different training.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…There is evidence that error-based learning leads to improved skill generalization and self-awareness compared to errorless learning for tasks such as meal preparation [26]. A three-armed randomized controlled trial study was recently completed comparing systematic instruction, error-based and trial and error learning approaches when training the use of smartphone based memory aids in brain injury rehabilitation [28,29,30]. Trial and error learning led to higher proficiency immediately after training compared to a highly structured systematic instruction, and led to better proficiency with the app one week later compared to an error-based learning method.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting People with Acquired Brain Injury to Use a Reminding App; Narrow-deep vs. Broad-shallow User Interfaces

Jamieson

McGee‐Lennon

Cullen

et al. 2022

ACM Trans. Access. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People with memory impairments following an acquired brain injury stand to benefit from smartphone apps as memory aids. Due, in part, to usability issues they use smartphone-based reminding less than the general population. Evidence suggests this group may benefit from user interface (UI) designs with more screens with less information per screen (narrow-deep UI) rather than fewer screens with more information per screen (broad-shallow UI). This study compared the difference in speed, accuracy, guidance needed, and task load for 32 people with acquired brain injury when setting reminders using narrow-deep and broad-shallow UI. They were also given cognitive assessments (measuring selective attention, executive functioning, and overall executive and memory ability) and interviewed about their UI preference. There was a significant difference in accuracy; participants were less accurate (they made two more errors on average for every three reminders set) using a broad-shallow compared to narrow-deep UI. The reason for this difference was that participants omitted more information when using broad-shallow UI. There were no differences in speed, guidance required, and overall task-load. Participants with better selective attention and more experience with smartphones benefited the most from narrow-deep UI compared to broad-shallow UI. Most participants preferred one UI over the other. Those who preferred narrow-deep found it easier to use, that they missed less information and liked having one piece of information at a time. Those who preferred broad-shallow found it easier to review the information and felt less likely to lose track. The findings can inform that implementation of UI choices to make apps more accessible for those with cognitive impairments.

show abstract