Library and Information Service >
Usability Evaluation of Health Search Engine Based on User Experience
Received date: 2016-01-08
Revised date: 2016-03-11
Online published: 2016-04-05
[Purpose/significance] The user is dissatisfied of China's health search engine with low usability. This study explores the usability of three general health search engines, in order to promote the development of this kind of search engine and improve the quality of information service. [Method/process] By an experiment, it discusses and compares the effectiveness, efficiency and user's satisfaction of "120ask", "haodf" and "39so" from the user's perspective. [Result/conclusion] Results indicate that three search engines all have good response speed and learnability, but their precision needs to be improved. The system returns rich information, but has some problems, such as information repetition, redundancy and imprecision. The subjective assessment of health information from user and evaluation result based on clinical evidence have conflict. It is necessary to study how to balance the conflict between them and develop a comprehensive and effective evaluation index system of health information.
Key words： user experience; health; search engine; usability; evaluation
Wang Ruojia , Li Yuelin . Usability Evaluation of Health Search Engine Based on User Experience[J]. Library and Information Service, 2016 , 60(7) : 92 -102 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2016.07.015
[1] SEFFAH A, METZKER E. METZKER, E. The obstacles and myths of usability and software engineering[J]. Communications of the ACM, 2004,47(12):71-76.
[2] Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)ISO 9241-11[S/OL].[2016-01-07].http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=16883.
[3] TAKSA I, SPINK A, GOLDBERG R. A task-oriented approach to search engine usability studies[J]. Journal of software, 2008, 3(1):63-73.
[4] GEORGSSON M, STAGGERS N. Quantifying usability:an evaluation of a diabetes mHealth system on effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction metrics with associated user characteristics[J]. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2016, 23(1):5-11.
[5] 柯青, 成颖, 郑彦宁,等. 搜索引擎可用性评价指标体系构建[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2011(11):24-30.
[6] NIELSEN J. Usability engineering[M]. Cambridge:Academic Press, 1993:1-17.
[7] KELLY D. Methods for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems with users[J]. Foundations & trends in information retrieval, 2009(3):1-224.
[8] BUZZI M, ANDRONICO P, LEPORINI B. Accessibility and usability of search engine interfaces:preliminary testing[C]//Adjunct Proceedings of 8th ERCIM UI4ALL Workshop. Vienna:National Research Council,2004.
[9] CHIN J P, NORMAN K L, SHNEIDERMAN B. Subjective user evaluation of CF PASCAL programming tools[R].Center for automation resesarch,University of Maryland,College Park, 1987.
[10] CHIN J P, DIEHL V A, NORMAN K L. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface[C]//Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York:ACM, 1988:213-218.
[11] ABBOTT P A. The effectiveness and clinical usability of a handheld information appliance[J]. Nursing research & practice, 2012:1-8.
[12] 裴一蕾, 薛万欣, 赵宗,等. 基于用户体验视角的搜索引擎评价研究[J]. 情报科学, 2013,31(5):94-97.
[13] 徐意能, 陈硕. 基于用户体验的搜索引擎有效性评估研究[J]. 人类工效学, 2008, 14(3):9-12.
[14] 于施洋, 王建冬, 刘合翔. 基于用户体验的政府网站优化:提升搜索引擎可见性[J]. 电子政务, 2012(8):8-18.
[15] CHANG P, HOU I C, HSU C L, et al. Are Google or Yahoo a good portal for getting quality healthcare Web information?[C]//AMIA annual symposium proceedings. Washington DC:American Medical Informatics Association, 2006:878.
[16] 王镠璞. 基于用户体验的互联网搜索引擎医学信息检索可用性评估研究[D]. 长春:吉林大学, 2010.
[17] 王若佳, 李培. 基于日志挖掘的用户健康信息检索行为研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(11):111-118.
[18] HACKMAN J R, VIDMAR N. Effects of size and task type on group performance and member reactions[J]. Sociometry, 1970,33(1):37-54.
[19] HACKMAN J R. Effects of task characteristics on group products[J]. Journal of experimental social psychology, 1968, 4(2):162-187.
[20] 王继民, 陈翀, 彭波. 大规模中文搜索引擎的用户日志分析[J]. 华南理工大学学报:自然科学版, 2004, 32(S1):1-5.
[21] LEIGHTON H V, SRIVASTAVA J. First 20 precision among World Wide Web search services(search engines)[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999, 50(10):870-881.
[22] YEHUDA N, LIOR F, CATALINA L Q, et al. Quality of online health information about oral contraceptives from Hebrew-language websites[J]. Israel journal of health policy research, 2012, 1(1):527-536.
[23] MICHAEL D S, RICHARD K G, SANDRA Y L. Clinical practice guideline:Allergic rhinitis executive summary[J]. Otolaryngology head neck surg, 2015, 152(2):197-206.[24]中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志编委会. 变应性鼻炎诊断和治疗指南[J]. 中国临床医生, 2010, 38(6):67-68.
[25] 刘力生. 中国高血压防治指南2010[J]. 中华高血压杂志, 2011, 39(8):701-708.
[26] NAEINI H S, MOSTOWFI S. Using QUIS as a measurement tool for user satisfaction evaluation (case study:vending Machine)[J]. International journal of information science, 2015, 5(1):14-23.
[27] ADEMILUYI G, REES C E, SGEARD C E. Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet[J]. Patient education & counseling, 2003, 50(2):151-155.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
