Evaluation of Project Engage - Staff Side

1. Evaluation of Project Engage- Staff Side Team RENEU - Anran Ye - Aalap Doshi - Gaurav Pimprikar - Yung-Ju Chang

2. Home • Overview of Project Engage • Methodology • Problems and Recommendations • Summary Home

3. Overview of Project Engage

4. Overview • “University of Michigan Engage is intended to provide ‘one-stop shopping’ for people who want to help medicine move forward by participating in clinical research at the University of Michigan.” Overview

5. Functionality • Engage has several features - study database, public search tool, community information as well as a secure Registry. • The Study Database feature allows study teams at University of Michigan to post their clinical research trials for the public to view. • The Registry is a feature that • allows interested volunteers to enroll in a registry, • automatically matches volunteers to potential studies so that researchers can contact them as potential candidates Overview

6. User Demographics 1 Busy Researchers who want to do their things quickly Overview 2 Study Co-ordinators who want an easy and intuitive system 3 Engage Staff who wants to make Engage an easy and pleasurable experience for the users

7. Successful Features • It is a very good concept and has the potential to reduce the difficulties in recruiting volunteers for clinical research. • "Once you get the hang of it, the website is easy to use." • The website is IRB approved and so one can post clinical studies on it without any concerns. • The Engage team is very cooperative and committed to the improvement of Engage. Overview

8. Methodology

9. Methodology Team RENUE has completed a thorough exploration of the website structure using: • Generalized Transition Network • Interviews and focus group • Comparative Analysis • Personas and Scenarios • Heuristic Evaluation using Jakob Nielson's Heuristics • User survey • Usability tests • Vocabulary Analysis Methodology

10. Problem areas and Recommendations

11. Problem Area 1: Login Absence of prominent login points for staff in the entire site. • There is a lack of clues leading users to the login page. • There is no separate section dedicated to login and the link is buried deep in text. • Users took an average of 4.2425 minutes just to login. Problems & Recommendations

12. Problem Area 1: Login Engage Main Page Problems & Recommendations fold

13. Problem Area 1: Login Still trying to login… Problems & Recommendations

14. Problem Area 1: Login Recommendations: • The staff login link should be present on the home page. • A prominent section dedicated to login on the home page will go a long way in making the website more accessible and user-friendly. Problems & Recommendations

15. Problem Area 2: Navigation The navigation through the system is hampered by the following problems: • Two sections critical to staff, namely “Post/Edit Study” and “Online Registry” are disconnected from each other. • Users have to go back to main page to get to another section. Problems & Recommendations

16. Problem Area 2: Navigation Problems & Recommendations

17. Problem Area 2: Navigation Recommendation: • A single login section on the home page leads to different options such as bulletin board, Registry, etc. • The use of a consistent navigation bar will make it possible for the users to move about freely on the website. Problems & Recommendations

18. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom • Lack Of User Control When Managing Volunteers • Users have very limited approach to categorize volunteers. • The buttons to categorize & corresponding category link have the same name and hence are easy to be confused with each other. • Lack of flexibility when categorizing volunteers. e.g: records can be moved from ‘Plan to Contact’ to ‘Contacted’ directly, but not the other way around. Problems & Recommendations

19. The button to categorize and corresponding category link have the same name and hence are easy to be confused with each other. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom Problems & Recommendations

20. Only one way tagging is possible Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom Problems & Recommendations

21. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom • Recommendations: • Users should be able to tag records from the full record page and move records from one category to another without extra steps. • A feedback mechanism needs to be implemented which states the actions that have taken place. • Long-term Recommendation: A main table for all volunteers with their status indicated Problems & Recommendations

22. A Mock-up of the Suggested Volunteer Tagging System Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom Problems & Recommendations

23. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom • B. Selection of Principal Investigator not clear • The principle investigators’ name cannot be typed into the box directly. • The tool of searching ‘Principal investigator’ only supports unique name and last name search. Problems & Recommendations

24. The principle investigators’ name cannot be typed into the box directly. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom Problems & Recommendations

25. The tool of searching ‘Principal investigator’ only supports unique name and last name search. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom Problems & Recommendations If the user did not know the unique name, the only alternative is to search the last name, which usually leads to quite a long list of names to choose from.

26. Problem Area 3: User Control & Freedom • Recommendations: • Allow the user to type into the textbox. • Design a drop down list of names, which emerges when users enter characters into the textbox. • More searching fields should be added into the ‘Principal investigator’ search such as first name as well as last name. Problems & Recommendations

27. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary • A: Metaphor -- My Bulletin Board • In the physical world: usually mentioned as a board for posting bulletins, messages and announcements. • In Engage: a system to post and edit studies. Problems & Recommendations

28. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary • Recommendation: • Short-term: • Replace the current metaphor with more intuitive term such as ‘My postings’ or ‘My studies’. • Long-term: • Design the ‘Bulletin Board’ to be similar to its real world counter part. • For example: • In-site communication system • Short messages, announcement, etc. Problems & Recommendations

29. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary B: Managing Volunteer The ‘Look at Volunteers' link leads to the ‘Requested Contact' list which often contains no records. Problems & Recommendations

30. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary Problems & Recommendations

31. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary • Recommendations: • Short-term: Replace ‘Requested Contact' with ‘Potential Subjects’. • Long-term: A main table for all volunteers with their status indicated (as discussed previously). Problems & Recommendations

32. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary C: ‘Find studies’ Link • The link to ‘My Bulletin Board’ is placed on the ‘find studies’ page. Hence the ‘find studies’ link misleads most users. • “So I have to go though ‘Find Studies ’ to post studies?”-- user testing, U02 Problems & Recommendations

33. Problem Area 4: Vocabulary Recommendations: • Place a separate link on the Engage home page titled ‘Bulletin Board’ or ‘Post/Edit studies’. OR • Rename ‘Find studies’ to ‘Find/Post studies’. Problems & Recommendations

34. Summary

35. Summary The Engage project is a significant step in helping Medical Researchers find suitable Volunteers. We believe that the above recommendations will improve their efficiency and create a better environment for the allocation of volunteers. Summary

36. Keep ‘Engage’ing… Thank You…