User Satisfaction With Assistive, Rehabilitation, and Training Technologies: Questionnaire Development and Content Validation Study.
Oskar Cvjetičanin, Ivana Marić, Nejc Šarabon
PMID 42789783WHAT IT FOUND
Experts rated a 50-item satisfaction questionnaire for assistive, rehabilitation, and training devices as mostly relevant, but no users tested it and it is not yet proven to measure satisfaction accurately.
Key findings
01The final 50-item questionnaire had an average expert relevance score of 0.915, above the acceptable standard.
02No actual end users were included in the development or content-validation process.
03The questionnaire has only initial evidence of content validity and needs further evaluation before it can be considered fully validated.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
No actual end users were included in the development or content-validation process, even though the questionnaire is meant to assess user satisfaction. The relevance decisions relied on expert opinion, and a different expert panel might have chosen different items. The questionnaire still needs testing with users, checking for consistency, and clear scoring rules. The literature review covered hardware technologies and English publications, so it may have missed relevant tools outside that scope. Many items may not apply to every device, so screening questions are needed before use.
Declared interests
The Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency funded the work through research programs KINSPO and VIRTUES. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use U-ART-Q as a validated outcome measure or assume it predicts adoption. It was only checked by experts, and no end users tested it.