A New Methodology (CON-INFO) for Context-Based Development of a Mobile User Interface in Healthcare Applications

  • Reem AlnanihEmail author
  • Olga Ormandjieva
  • T. Radhakrishnan
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


Mobile technology is an integral part of the modern healthcare environment. In Pervasive Healthcare, the Mobile User interface (MUI) serves as the bridge between the application and the healthcare professional. It is important that the doctor be able to easily express his needs on the MUI and correctly interpret the information displayed. The context-based MUI design methodology developed in this chapter offers a new approach to automated MUI context adaptation. This methodology for designing an adaptable context-dependent MUI for healthcare applications provides a solution that makes essential patient information available to doctors in an easily accessible, clear, and accurate way, and at any time. The quality-in-use of the MUI designed with this methodology is monitored using a new measurement model inspired by the ISO 25010 international standard and adapted to healthcare. The measurement model is validated both theoretically and empirically. The benefits of the proposed methodology for healthcare professionals include improved productivity, performance, and level of satisfaction, as well as increased patient safety, as doctors can access patient information whenever it is needed. The methodology is illustrated on a case study.


Context Model Pervasive Computing Decision Table Task Navigation Inpatient Ward 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bardram, J. E. (2004). Applications of context-aware computing in hospital work: Examples and design principles. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied, Computing (pp. 1574–1579).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bardram, J. E., & Hansen, T. R. (2004). The AWARE architecture: Supporting context mediated social awareness in mobile cooperation (pp. 192–201). Chicago: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kinkade, S., & Verclas, K. (2008). Wireless technology for social change. Washington, DC, and Berkshire, UK. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from
  4. 4.
    Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (3rd ed.). England: British Library Cataloguing.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alvarado, C., et al. (2004) Panel: The role of human factors in healthcare—2020. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting, SAGE Publications (Vol. 48, pp. 1764–1767).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thimbleby, H. (2007). User-centered methods are insufficient for safety critical systems. In A. Holzinger (Eds.), HCI and usability for medicine and health care: Third symposium of the workgroup human-computer interaction and usability engineering of the Austrian computer society (Vol. 4799, pp. 1–20). Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thimbleby, H., & Thimbleby, W. (2007). Internalist and externalist HCI. Lancaster: British Computer Society.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holzinger, A., & Errath, M. (2007). Mobile computer Web-application design in medicine: Some research based guidelines. Universal Access in the Information Society International Journal, 6(1), 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holzinger, A. (2005). Usability engineering for software developers. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holzinger, A. (2004). Application of rapid prototyping to the user interface development for a virtual medical campus. IEEE Software, 21(1), 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO/ IEC 25010. (2011(E)). Systems and software engineering—systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE)—system and software quality models. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Alnanih, R., Ormandjieva, O., & Radhakrishnan, T. (2013). A new quality-in-use model for mobile user interfaces. In Proceedings of the 23nd International Workshop on Software Measurement, IWSM-MENSURA (To appear).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dey, A. K., & Abowd, G. D. (2000). Towards a better understanding of context and context awareness. In Proceedings of the CHI (2000) Workshop on the What, Who, Where, When and How of Context-Awareness. New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schilit, B., & Theimer, M. (1994). Disseminating active map information to mobile hosts. IEEE Network, 8(5), 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown, P. J., Bovey, J. D., & Chen, X. (1997). Context-aware applications: From the laboratory to the marketplace. IEEE Personal Communications, 4(5), 58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ryan, N., Pascoe, J., & Morse, D. (1997). Enhanced reality fieldwork: The context-aware archaeological assistant. In V. Gaffney, M. Van Leusen & S. Exxon (Eds.), Computer applications in archaeology. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dey, A. K. (1998). Context-aware computing: The cyberdesk project. In Proceedings of the AAAI 1998 Spring Symposium on Intelligent, Environments (pp. 51–54).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Franklin, D., & Flaschbart, J. (1998). All gadget and no representation makes jack a dull environment. In Proceedings of AAAI 1998 Spring Symposium on Intelligent Environments. AAAI TR (pp. 155–160).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ward, A., Jones, A., & Hopper, A. (1997). A new location technique for the active office. IEEE Personal Commun, 4(5), 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rodden, T., Cheverst, K., Davies, K., & Dix, A. (1998). Exploiting context in HCI design for mobile systems. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hull, R., Neaves, P., & Bedford-Roberts, J. (1997). Towards situated computing. In Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Wearable Computers (pp. 146–153).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pascoe, J. (1998). Adding generic contextual capabilities to wearable computers. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Wearable Computers (pp. 92–99).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pascoe, J., Rodrigues, H., & Ariza, C. (2006). An investigation into a universal context model to support context-aware applications. Springer, 4278, 1884–1893.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gwizdka, J. (2000). What’s in the context? In Proceedings of the Workshop on the What, Who, Where, When, and How of Context-Awareness.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Flanagan, J. A., Mintyjarvi, J., & Himberg, J. (2002). Unsupervised clustering of symbol strings and context recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Data Mining (pp. 171–178).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schmidt, A. (2000). Implicit human computer interaction through context. Personal Ubiquitous Comput, 4(2/3), 191–199.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Korpipää, P., & Mantyjarvi, J. (2003). An ontology for mobile device sensor-based context awareness (CONTEXT-03) (pp. 451–458). Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Savio, N., & Braiterman, J. (2007). Design sketch: The context of mobile interaction (pp. 5–7). Singapore: IJMM.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Floyd, I. R., Jones, M. C., & Twidale, M. B. (2004). Resolving incommensurable debates: a preliminary identification of persona kinds, attributes, and characteristics. Artifact, 2(1), 12–26.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nielsen, L. (2013). Personas—user focused design. Human—computer interaction series (1–154). Springer: London. (ISBN 978-1-4471-4083-2).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dantin, U. (2005). Application of personas in user interface design for educational software. In Proceedings of the 7th Australasian conference on Computing, Education (pp. 239–247).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Versloot, C. (2005). Information filtering: Personal profile usable as stereotype profile?Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Turner, P., & Tuner, S. (2011). Is stereotyping inevitable when designing with personas. Design Studies, 32(1), 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, J. W. (1994). Stereotypes. In J. R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (2nd ed., pp. 1–68). Hillsdale, NJ: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Oaks, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & Turner, J. C. (1994). Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fröhlich, N., et al. (2009). LoCa—Towards a context-aware infrastructure for eHealth applications. In Proceedings of Fifteenth International Conference on Distributed, Multimedia Systems (DMS’09) (pp. 52–57).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Clerckx, T., Winters, F., & Coninx, K. (2005). Tool support for designing context-sensitive user interfaces using a model-based approach. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Task Models and Diagrams, Gdansk, Poland (pp. 11–18).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yuan, B., & Herbert, J. (2012). A fuzzy-based context modeling and reasoning framework for CARA pervasive healthcare. In Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on (ANT 2012), Procardia Computer Science (Vol. 10, pp. 357–365).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shi-wei, C., & Shou-Qian, S. (2009). Adaptive 3D navigation user interface design based on rough sets. In Proceedings of the IEEE 10th International Conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design (pp. 1935–1940).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vogt, J., & Meier, A. (2010). An adaptive user interface framework for eHealth services based on UIML. In Proceedings of the 23rd Bled eConference eTrust: Implications for the Individual, Enterprises and Society (Bled 2010) (pp. 409–422).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bevan, N. (1999). Quality in use: Meeting user needs for quality. Journal of System and Software, 49, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    IEC 62366. (2007). Medical devices-application of usability engineering to medical devices. Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    ISO 9241–210. (2010). Ergonomics of human-system interaction—part 210: Human-centered design for interactive systems. Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    ISO 9241–11. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)—part 11: Guidance on usability. Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Huang, K. (2009). Challenges in human-computer interaction design for mobile devices. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science, San Francisco, USA (Vol. 1). Retrieved from
  46. 46.
    Alnanih, R., Radhakrishnan, T., & Ormandjieva, O. (2012). Characterising context for mobile user interfaces in health care applications. In Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on (PASTH 2012), Procardia Computer Science (Vol. 10, pp. 1086–1093).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Battisto, D., Pak, R., Vander, M. A., & Pilcher, J. J. (2009). Using a task analysis to describe nursing work in acute care patient environments. Journal of Nursing Administration, 39(12), 537–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Alnanih, R., Ormandjieva, O., & Radhakrishnan, T. (2013). Context-based user stereotype model for mobile user interfaces in health care applications. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on (FAMS, 2013), Procardia Computer Science (Vol. 19, pp. 1020–1027).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    De Melo, G., Honold, F., Weber, M., Poguntke, M., & Berton, A. (2009). Towards a flexible UI model for automotive human-machine interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Automotive UI and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 47–50).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Alnanih, R., Al-Nuaim, H., & Ormandjieva, O. (2009). New health information systems (HIS) quality-in-use model based on the GQM approach and HCI principles. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on HCI, Part IV. Berlin Heidelberg (pp. 429–438).Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Dumas, J. L., & Redish, J. C. (1999). A practical guide to usability testing (3rd ed.). Wiltshire: Intellect.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ziefle, M., Röcker, C., & Holzinger, A. (2014). Current trends and challenges for pervasive health technologies: From technical innovation to user integration. In Pervasive health: State-of-the-art and beyond.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fenton, N. E., & Bieman, J. (2014). Software metrics: A practical and rigorous approach (3rd ed.). UK: Taylor and Francis. (For publication 2014).Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Peter, H. J. (2013). Design for care: Innovating healthcare experience.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dumas, J. L., & Redish, J. C. (1999). A practical guide to usability testing (3rd ed.). Wiltshire: Intellect.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Klasnja, P., & Pratt, W. (2012). Healthcare in the pocket: Mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 45(1), 184–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Cook, D. J., & Das, S. K. (2012). Pervasive computing at scale: Transforming the state of the art. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 8(1), 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Curtis, B. (1980). Measurement and experimentation in software engineering. Proceedings of the IEEE, 68(9), 1144–1157.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Victor R. B., Richard W. S. & David H. H. (1986). Experimentation in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 12(7), 733–743.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reem Alnanih
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Olga Ormandjieva
    • 1
  • T. Radhakrishnan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Software EngineeringConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations