JOURNAL ARTICLE · EDITORIAL BRIEF
Co-Designing a Digital Platform for the Management of Modifiable Risk Factors and Comorbidities in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Mixed Methods Usability Study
Sofia Klavebäck; Frieder Braunschweig; Matthias Lidin; Emma Svennberg
JMIR Human Factors · 22 October 2026
The finding or development
Patient co-design informed simpler navigation, layered information and a system letting patients choose which recommendations to pursue. In subsequent testing, median SUS was 78.8/100. Interviews identified further needs for flexible advice and respectful communication.
What supports it
Peer-reviewed mixed-methods usability study: 22 patients, System Usability Scale (SUS) and interviews.
Reviewed: Publisher abstract, methods, results, discussion and limitations; supplementary files not reviewed.
Why it matters for design
A published practice example connecting patient feedback to interface decisions, while showing why a usability score needs qualitative explanation.
Read with this in mind
Short hospital sessions with Swedish-speaking patients, not sustained home use. No comparison group establishes improvement from co-design; clinical benefits were not tested. The authors identify possible selection and interpretation bias.
Original source
Opens the publisher outside this reading room. If nothing opens, copy the source address below.
Reference tools · Paperpile & more
Using Paperpile? Open the original source above, then use the Paperpile extension to save it to your library. Its inline buttons appear on supported websites.
Paperpile’s browser extension guide (opens an external website)Or download the original reference and import the file into Paperpile, Zotero or EndNote. Check the details against the source before citing.
Citation details are requested from Crossref when you download. The file contains a reference, not the full paper.
DOI: 10.2196/95810
This is the complete UX Observatory brief, not the publisher’s full article. Follow the original source to read the work.