Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Currently accepted at: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Dec 20, 2023
Open Peer Review Period: Dec 21, 2023 - Feb 15, 2024
Date Accepted: Sep 7, 2024
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

This paper has been accepted and is currently in production.

It will appear shortly on 10.2196/55694

The final accepted version (not copyedited yet) is in this tab.

Design Guidelines for Improving Mobile Sensing Data Collection: A Prospective Mixed-Methods Study

  • Christopher Slade; 
  • Roberto M Benzo; 
  • Peter Washington

ABSTRACT

Background:

Machine learning models often use passively recorded sensor data streams as inputs to train machine learning models that predict outcomes captured through EMA. Despite the growth of mobile data collection, challenges in obtaining proper authorization to send notifications, receive background events, and perform background tasks persist.

Objective:

We aimed to explore these challenges in real-world settings to develop design guidelines for mobile sensing applications to ensure better data collection.

Methods:

We developed mobile sensing applications for iOS and Android devices. We tested them through a mixed-method user study involving college students (n = 145) for 30 days to answer the following research questions. (1) How do contextual prompting and setup prompting affect scheduled notification delivery and the response rate of notification-initiated EMA? (2) Which authorization paradigm, setup or contextual prompting, is more successful in leading users to grant authorization to receive background events? (3) Which polling-based method, persistent reminders or scheduled background tasks, completes more background sessions?

Results:

For RQ1, setup and contextual prompting yielded no significant difference (ANOVA F(1,144) = 0.0227, P = .88) in EMA compliance, with an average of 23.4 out of 30 completed (SD 7.36). However, qualitative analysis showed that contextual prompting on iOS devices resulted in inconsistent notification delivery. For RQ2, contextual prompting for background events was 55.5% (X2=4.42, df=1, P < .035) more effective in gaining authorization for background events. For RQ3, users showed resistance to installing the persistent reminder, but when installed, the persistent reminder performed 226.5% more background sessions than traditional background tasks.

Conclusions:

We developed the following guidelines from both quantitative and qualitative results to improve mobile sensing on consumer mobile devices. Qualitative results showed that contextual prompts on iOS devices resulted in inconsistent notification delivery, unlike setup prompting on Android devices. We recommend using setup prompting for notifications. Consistent with prior works, contextual prompting is more efficient for authorizing background events. Developing a persistent reminder and requiring participants to install it provides an additional way to poll for sensor and user data and could improve data consistency.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Slade C, Benzo RM, Washington P

Design Guidelines for Improving Mobile Sensing Data Collection: A Prospective Mixed-Methods Study

Journal of Medical Internet Research. 07/09/2024:55694 (forthcoming/in press)

DOI: 10.2196/55694

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/55694

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time. Copyright

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.