Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Contemp Clin Trials. 2018 May 12;70:24–34. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.05.005

Table 3.

Results of the Marshfield Usability Survey: (1=Strongly Disagree; 2=Disagree; 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree; 4=Agree; 5=Strongly Agree). Results indicate very high usability. N = 25. SD = standard deviation, IQR = interquartile range.

Marshfield usability survey statements Mean (SD) Median(IQR)
I thought the system was easy to use 4.6 (0.5) 5 (4.0–5.0)
I felt very confident using the system 4.5 (0.5) 5 (4.0–5.0)
I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with the system 2.1 (1.0) 2 (1.0–2.0)
I felt that I needed someone’s help to be able to use the system 2.3 (1.3) 2 (1.0–4.0)
I found the system to be complex 1.6 (0.5) 2 (1.0–2.0)
Using the system did not take much time 4.5 (0.5) 5 (4.0–5.0)
I could always trust the system to work 4.1 (0.9) 4 (4.0–5.0)
My privacy was protected when I used the system 4.2 (0.8) 4 (4.0–5.0)
Using the system was as satisfying as talking to a real person 3.7 (0.8) 4 (3.0–4.0)
It was easy to learn to use the system 4.5 (0.6) 5 (4.0–5.0)
In general, I was satisfied with the system 4.6 (0.5) 5 (4.0–5.0)
I think most people could learn to use the system very quickly 4.4 (0.7) 5 (4.0–5.0)
I think I would like to use the system again 3.8 (1.1) 4 (3.0–5.0)
The system could help me better manage my health and medical needs 4.1 (1.1) 4 (4.0–5.0)
I could be more involved in my care by using the system 4.1 (1.1) 4 (4.0–5.0)
The system could help me monitor my medical condition 4.1 (1.0) 4 (4.0–5.0)