Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Optom Vis Sci. 2018 Dec;95(12):1135–1141. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001308

Table 3.

Descriptive statistics for reported agreement with ease of use for the Netra device (n=50 subjects).

Ease of Use Survey Item Mean* SD Min Max Median P**
I think that I would like to use this device frequently 3.42 1.18 1 5 3.0 .60
I found this device was unnecessarily complex 1.70 1.16 1 5 1.0 .80
I thought this device was easy to use 4.22 1.23 1 5 5.0 .44
I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this device 2.34 1.36 1 5 2.0 .81
I found the various functions in this device were well integrated 4.00 1.16 1 5 4.0 .70
I thought there was too much inconsistency in this device 2.00 1.28 1 5 1.0 .25
I would imagine that most people would learn to use this device very quickly 4.22 0.97 1 5 4.0 .19
I found this device very cumbersome to use 2.04 1.18 1 5 2.0 .16
I felt very confident using this device 4.12 1.06 1 5 4.0 .33
I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this device 1.76 1.20 1 5 1.0 .81
Netra SUS Score 75.35 19.83 15 100 80.0 .78

SD = Standard Deviation; SUS = System Usability Scale

*

Mean (and other descriptive statistics) response for the 10 ease of use survey items based on the original Likert scale: strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)

**

Two-sample Wilcoxon test to compare Netra scores between subjects <65 years old and ≥65 years old