Dimensionality of the system usability scale among professionals using internet-based interventions for depression: a confirmatory factor analysis.

BACKGROUND: The System Usability Scale (SUS) is used to measure usability of internet-based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (iCBT). However, whether the SUS is a valid instrument to measure usability in this context is unclear. The aim of this study is to assess the factor structure of the SUS, measuring usability of iCBT for depression in a sample of professionals. In addition, the psychometric properties (reliability, convergent validity) of the SUS were tested. METHODS: A sample of 242 professionals using iCBT for depression from 6 European countries completed the SUS. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to test whether a one-factor, two-factor, tone-model or bi-direct model would fit the data best. Reliability was assessed using complementary statistical indices (e.g. omega). To assess convergent validity, the SUS total score was correlated with an adapted Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-3). RESULTS: CFA supported the one-factor, two-factor and tone-model, but the bi-factor model fitted the data best (Comparative Fit Index = 0.992, Tucker Lewis Index = 0.985, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.055, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual = 0.042 (respectively χ2diff (9) = 69.82, p < 0.001; χ2diff (8) = 33.04, p < 0.001). Reliability of the SUS was good (ω = 0.91). The total SUS score correlated moderately with the CSQ-3 (CSQ1 rs = .49, p < 0.001; CSQ2 rs = .46, p < 0.001; CSQ3 rs = .38, p < 0.001), indicating convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: Although the SUS seems to have a multidimensional structure, the best model showed that the total sumscore of the SUS appears to be a valid and interpretable measure to assess the usability of internet-based interventions when used by professionals in mental healthcare.

Informed choice about Down syndrome screening - effect of an eHealth tool: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an eHealth intervention (interactive website) on pregnant women's ability to make an informed choice about Down syndrome screening. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial with allocation to an intervention group and a control group in a ratio of 1:1. Subsequent subgroup analysis was conducted. Participants were recruited from 5 August 2013 to 25 April 2014 at Odense University Hospital, Denmark. Inclusion criteria were: pregnant women aged ≥18 years who were invited to participate in Down syndrome screening. Exclusion criteria were: high risk of abortion, psycho-socially vulnerable women, late referral, inability to speak Danish and women declining to participate. The primary outcome was informed choice about Down syndrome screening. The Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice was used to assess whether the choice was informed or uninformed. RESULTS: A total of 1150 participants were included in the study, of which 910 (79%) completed the questionnaire. Only a minority (30% of the women in the intervention group) actually used the website. There was no significant difference in the groups with respect to making an informed choice. The mean knowledge scores were significantly higher for those in the intervention group who used the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: An interactive website with information about Down syndrome screening had no direct effect on making an informed choice. However, the majority of the pregnant women who used the website were satisfied with the website and would recommend it to others.

Providing information about prenatal screening for Down syndrome: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades there have been advances in the options for prenatal screening. Screening programmes for Down syndrome are well established in many countries. It is important that pregnant women are well informed about the benefits and risks of screening. A variety of interventions has been introduced to support pregnant women in their choice of prenatal screening. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature using randomized controlled trials to compare the effects of different interventions to provide pregnant women with the information necessary to make an informed choice about screening for Down syndrome. DESIGN: Systematic review METHODS: A systematic search was performed using the PUBMED and EMBASE databases. The search terms included MeSH terms and free text and were combined by Boolean terms (AND, OR) with no restriction on language or time. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Knowledge, informed choice, patient satisfaction, anxiety, depression, conflict and worries. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the review. All were characterised by having one or more interventions designed to improve the level of information about prenatal screening for Down syndrome. A positive effect on knowledge and satisfaction from the information received was found in the majority of the studies. The studies were heterogeneous with respect to interventions, methodology and outcome measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions aimed at providing pregnant women with specific information about prenatal screening for Down syndrome can improve their ability to make an informed choice.