TABLE 2:
CHANGE IN ACCEPTABILITY OF INTERVENTION MEASURE (AIM), FEASIBILITY OF INTERVENTION MEASURE (FIM), AND MOBILE APPLICATION RATING SCALE (MARS) ACROSS ITERATIONS.
| Score | |
|---|---|
| AIM | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.4 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.4 |
| Change Score | 0.0 |
| FIM | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.2 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.5 |
| Change Score | 0.3 |
| MARS | |
| Section A: Engagement | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.0 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.0 |
| Change Score | 0.0 |
| Section B: Functionality | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.2 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.3 |
| Change Score | 0.1 |
| Section C: Aesthetics | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.2 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.2 |
| Change Score | 0.0 |
| Section E: App Subjective Quality | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.0 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.2 |
| Change Score | 0.2 |
| Section F: App-Specific | |
| Prototype 1 Mean | 4.2 |
| Prototype 2 Mean+ | 4.1 |
| Change Score | −0.1 |
Note: AIM: Acceptibility of Intervention Measure, FIM: Feasiblity of Intervention Measure, MARS: Mobile Application Rating Scale. MARS Section D (Information, e.g., app store description, use in published scientific research) was omitted due to the development phase of this work.
11 of 12 participant responses to date.