Home > Publications database > Usability Analysis of the 'Sample Locator': a Federated Online Search Tool for Biospecimens. > print

001     157142
005     20240229123130.0
024 7 _ |a 10.2196/17739
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:32663150
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 1438-8871
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1439-4456
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a altmetric:88454625
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2020-01428
041 _ _ |a eng
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Schüttler, Christina
|b 0
245 _ _ |a Usability Analysis of the 'Sample Locator': a Federated Online Search Tool for Biospecimens.
260 _ _ |a Richmond, Va.
|c 2020
|b Healthcare World
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1598940038_9454
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
500 _ _ |a 2020 Aug 18;22(8):e17739
520 _ _ |a The German Biobank Alliance (GBA) aims to establish a cross-site biobank network. For this endeavor, the so-called Sample Locator has been developed ‒ a federated search-tool for biospecimens and related data ‒ forming the heart of its IT infrastructure.To ensure the sustainable use of such a tool, we included researchers as participants in an end user based usability evaluation.To develop a prototype ready for evaluation, we needed input from GBA IT experts. Thus, we conducted a two-day workshop with eight GBA IT team members. Focus was on the respective steps of a user-centered design process. With the acquired knowledge, the participants designed low fidelity mockups. The main ideas of these mockups were discussed, extracted and summarized into a comprehensive prototype using MS PowerPoint. Furthermore, we created a questionnaire concerning the usability of the prototype including the System Usability Score (SUS), questions on negative/ positive aspects, and typical tasks to be fulfilled with the tool. Subsequently, the prototype was pre-tested on basis of this questionnaire with researchers having biobank background. Based on this preliminary work, the usability analysis was ultimately carried out with researchers and the results were evaluated.Altogether 27 researchers familiar with sample requests evaluated the prototype. The analysis of the feedback certifies a good usability given the Sample Locator prototype was seen as intuitive and user-friendly, by 74% of the participants. The total SUS score of 25 persons that completed the questionnaire is 80.4, indicating good system usability. Still, the evaluation provided useful advice on optimization potential, e.g. by offering a help function.The findings of this usability analysis indicate that the considerations regarding a user-friendly application, which have been made in the development process so far, strongly coincide with the perception of the study participants. Nevertheless, it was important to engage prospective end users to ensure that the previous development is going in the desired direction and that the Sample Locator will be used in the future. The user comments and suggestions for improvement will be considered in upcoming iterations for refinement.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|c POF3-315
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
700 1 _ |a Huth, Verena
|b 1
700 1 _ |a von Jagwitz-Biegnitz, Magdaléna
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Lablans, Martin
|0 P:(DE-He78)e4ad7b4e684492de43cfcb12e5397439
|b 3
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Prokosch, Hans-Ulrich
|b 4
700 1 _ |a Griebel, Lena
|b 5
773 _ _ |a 10.2196/17739
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2028830-X
|n 8
|p e17739
|t Journal of medical internet research
|v 22
|y 2020
|x 1438-8871
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:157142
|p VDB
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 3
|6 P:(DE-He78)e4ad7b4e684492de43cfcb12e5397439
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|v Imaging and radiooncology
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|b Gesundheit
914 1 _ |y 2020
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b J MED INTERNET RES : 2018
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0320
|2 StatID
|b PubMed Central
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ Seal
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ : Peer review
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)
|0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV
|2 V:(DE-HGF)
|b DOAJ
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0160
|2 StatID
|b Essential Science Indicators
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a Article Processing Charges
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0561
|2 StatID
|f 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a Submission fee
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0562
|2 StatID
|d 2020-01-15
915 _ _ |a Fees
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0700
|2 StatID
|d 2020-01-15
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E260-20160331
|k E260
|l Verbundinformationssysteme
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E260-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED

LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21