Acceptability and Usability of a Digital Platform Promoting Mental Health at Work: A Qualitative Evaluation

Figures & data

Table 1. Respondents’ sociodemographic data.

Variable	n	%
Sex
Male	16	51
Female	15	49
Age
20-30	4	13
31-40	9	29
41-50	8	26
51-60	7	23
61-70	2	6
71-80	1	3
Sector
Private	18	58
Public	8	26
Private-public	5	16
Industry
Consultancy	8	28
Research	7	24
Healthcare	6	20
Manufacturing	2	7
Information Technology	1	3
Communication	1	3
Food	1	3
Education	1	3
Insurance	1	3
Unions	1	3
Logistics	1	3
Total	31	100

Note. n = sample size. % = percentage.

Table 2. Definitions of this study’s themes and related pre-existing categories.

Identified Themes	Definition	Reference
Usability
System intuitiveness	The intuitiveness of design aspects, ensuring consistency and facilitating navigation	Consistency in layout and easy of navigation (Diehl et al., 2022)
Information Clarity	Clear information format from the system and as practical instructions of the tools	Instructions should be concise, simple, and relevant (Diehl et al., 2022)
Perceived Enjoyment	Emotional reactions by users	Elicit positive emotions via visual elements (Diehl et al., 2022)
Acceptability
Performance expectancy	System perceived usefulness, enhancing motivation and awareness	System aids in job performance and motivation (Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Trust	Trustworthiness of tools regarding the effectiveness of functionalities and privacy concerns	Trust in information system’s privacy and effectiveness (Arfi et al., 2021)
Facilitating Conditions	Contextual factors influencing platform adoption	Existence of support infrastructure for system use (Venkatesh et al., 2003)

Figure 1. Two sections of the Economic calculator.

Figure 2. The psychosocial well-being tool dashboard showing examples results provided by the decision support system.

Figure 3. Layout of the benchmarking tool.

Diehl, C., Martins, A., Almeida, A., Silva, T., Ribeiro, Ó., Santinha, G., Rocha, N., & Silva, A. G. (2022). Defining recommendations to guide user interface design: Multimethod approach. JMIR Human Factors, 9(3), e37894. https://doi.org/10.2196/37894

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. A., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Arfi, W. B., Nasr, I. B., Kondrateva, G., & Hikkerova, L. (2021). The role of trust in intention to use the IoT in eHealth: Application of the modified UTAUT in a consumer context. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167, 120688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120688

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar