Accessibility needs and challenges of a mHealth system for patients with dexterity impairments

References

• World Health Organization. Innovative care for chronic conditions: building blocks for action: global report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2002
   Google Scholar
• Krause JS, Carter RE, Pickelsimer EE, Wilson D. A prospective study of health and risk of mortality after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:1482–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmanto B, Pramana G, Yu DX, et al. iMHere: a novel mHealth system for supporting self-care in management of complex and chronic conditions. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2013;1:e10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zemper ED, Tate DG, Roller S, et al. Assessment of a holistic wellness program for persons with spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003;82:957–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuifbergen A, Becker H. Health promotion practices in women with multiple sclerosis: increasing quality and years of healthy life. Phys Med Rehabil Clin North Am 2001;12:9–22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ipsen C, Ravesloot C, Arnold N, Seekins T. Working well with a disability: health promotion as a means to employment. Rehabil Psychol 2012;57:187–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravesloot C, Seekins T, Cahill T, et al. Health promotion for people with disabilities: development and evaluation of the Living Well with a Disability program. Health Educ Res 2007;22:522–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravesloot C, Ruggiero C, Ipsen C, et al. Disability and health behavior change. Disabil Health J 2011;4:19–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner EH, Bennett SM, Austin BT, et al. Finding common ground: patient-centeredness and evidence-based chronic illness care. J Altern Complement Med 2005;11:s-7–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the chronic care model, Part 2. JAMA 2002;288:1909–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holman H. Chronic disease – the need for a new clinical education. JAMA 2004;292:1057–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorig KR, Sobel DS, Stewart AL, et al. Evidence suggesting that a chronic disease self-management program can improve health status while reducing hospitalization: a randomized trial. Med Care 1999;37:5–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairman AD, Dicianno BE, Pramana I, et al., eds. Usability testing of smartphone apps for spina bifida: clinical perspective. American Telemedicine Association Conference; 2011 May 1–3; Tampa, FL
   Google Scholar
• Fairman AD, Dicianno BE, Datt N, et al. Outcomes of Clinicians, caregivers, family members and adults with spina bifida regarding receptivity to use of the imhere mhealth solution to promote wellness. Int J Telerehabil 2013;5:3–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yu DX, Parmanto B, Dicianno BE, Pramana G. Accessibility of mHealth self-care apps for individuals with Spina Bifida. Perspect Health Inform Manage Spring 2015:1--19
   Google Scholar
• Pleis JR, Ward BW, Lucas JW. Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2009. Vital and health statistics. Series 10, Data from the National Health Survey. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 2010:1–207
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2006. Available from: http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml [last accessed 17 Feb 2015]
   Google Scholar
• Desrosiers J, Hebert R, Bravo G, Dutil E. The Purdue Pegboard Test: normative data for people aged 60 and over. Disabil Rehabil 1995;17:217–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozcelik IB, Purisa H, Sezer I, et al. [Evaluation of long-term results in mutilating hand injuries]. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2009;15:164–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delp HL, Newton RA. Effects of brief cold exposure on finger dexterity and sensibility in subjects with Raynaud's phenomenon. Phys Ther 1986;66:503–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson BC, Iacoviello JM, Wilson JJ, Risucci D. Purdue Pegboard performance of normal preschool children. J Clin Neuropsychol 1982;4:19–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smoot B, Wong J, Cooper B, et al. Upper extremity impairments in women with or without lymphedema following breast cancer treatment. J Cancer Surv 2010;4:167–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis C. Using the “thinking-aloud” method in cognitive interface design. Yorktown Heights, New York: IBM TJ Watson Research Center; 1982
   Google Scholar
• Parmanto B, Saptono A, Pramana G, et al. VISYTER: versatile and integrated system for telerehabilitation. Telemed e-Health 2010;16:939–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte JL, Gales S, Filippone AB, et al. Evaluation of a telerehabilitation system for community-based rehabilitation. Int J Telerehabil 2012;4:15–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner C, Lewis J, Nielsen J. Determining usability test sample size. In: Waldemar K, ed. International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors. Vol. 3. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2006:3084--8
   Google Scholar
• Lewis JR. Sample sizes for usability tests: mostly math, not magic. Interactions 2006;13:29–33
   Google Scholar
• Hertzum M, Jacobsen NE. The evaluator effect: a chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. Int J Hum Comput Interact 2003;15:183–204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner L. Beyond the five-user assumption: benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2003;35:379–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dix A. Human–computer interaction. Springer US; 2009
   Google Scholar