Identifying Quality Factors for Self-Tracking Solutions: A Systematic Literature Review

Self-tracking solutions have become globally widespread, as they promise numerous advantages (e.g. improving health) to their users. Despite their benefits, such solutions are often abandoned due to quality issues. This phenomenon can also be observed for digitized products in general. As self-tracking solutions are hybrid products, combining digital and physical components, traditional domain-independent and abstract quality models like the prominent ISO 25000 standard seem to not cover quality in an appropriate way. We address these issues by answering the research question of which factors affect quality perceptions of different stakeholder groups when interacting in a wearable ecosystem. We use a systematic literature review based on a research protocol to identify and analyze 98 quality-influencing factors from 19 studies that we cluster in a map. The identified factors are compared to the ISO 25000 standard, showing that certain factors like hedonic motivation are unconsidered thoroughly in the existing standard.

[1]  Kai-Yu Tang,et al.  Investigating the Success Factors for the Acceptance of Mobile Healthcare Technology , 2013, PACIS.

[2]  Sebastian K. Boell,et al.  On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews in IS , 2015, J. Inf. Technol..

[3]  Lauri Frank,et al.  Inhibitors, enablers and social side winds Explaining the use of exercise tracking systems , 2014, Bled eConference.

[4]  Káthia Marçal de Oliveira,et al.  Quality characteristics and measures for human–computer interaction evaluation in ubiquitous systems , 2017, Software Quality Journal.

[5]  Yiwen Gao,et al.  An empirical study of wearable technology acceptance in healthcare , 2015, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[6]  Ali Idri,et al.  Empirical Studies on Usability of mHealth Apps: A Systematic Literature Review , 2015, Journal of Medical Systems.

[7]  Walter Ganz,et al.  An Integrated Approach for Measuring and Managing Quality of Smart Senior Care Services , 2017 .

[8]  Rodina Binti Ahmad,et al.  Impact analysis and change propagation in service-oriented enterprises: A systematic review , 2015, Inf. Syst..

[9]  Jean-Francois De Moya,et al.  Quantified Self: a literature Review based on the Funnel Paradigm , 2017, ECIS.

[10]  Melanie Swan,et al.  Sensor Mania! The Internet of Things, Wearable Computing, Objective Metrics, and the Quantified Self 2.0 , 2012, J. Sens. Actuator Networks.

[11]  Tom Fawcett Mining the Quantified Self: Personal Knowledge Discovery as a Challenge for Data Science , 2015, Big Data.

[12]  Frank Jacob,et al.  Value-in-Use and Mobile Technologies , 2014, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[13]  Yair Levy,et al.  A Systems Approach to Conduct an Effective Literature Review in Support of Information Systems Research , 2006, Informing Sci. Int. J. an Emerg. Transdiscipl..

[14]  Tore Dybå,et al.  Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[15]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Challenges and Recommendations of Literature Search in Information Systems Research , 2015, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Isabel de la Torre Díez,et al.  Development and Evaluation of Tools for Measuring the Quality of Experience (QoE) in mHealth Applications , 2013, Journal of Medical Systems.

[17]  Guy Paré,et al.  Standalone Literature Reviews in IS Research: What Can Be Learnt From the Past and Other Fields? , 2016, ICIS.

[18]  M. Porter,et al.  How Smart, Connected Products Are Transforming Companies , 2015 .

[19]  Noel Carroll,et al.  Software-as-a-Medical Device: demystifying Connected Health regulations , 2016, J. Syst. Inf. Technol..

[20]  Matthew Chalmers,et al.  Personal tracking as lived informatics , 2014, CHI.

[21]  Ulrich Schreiber,et al.  Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung : Zfbf , 2010 .

[22]  Michiel Meulendijk,et al.  What Concerns Users of Medical Apps? Exploring Non-Functional Requirements of Medical Mobile Applications , 2014, ECIS.

[23]  Jahangir Karimi,et al.  Technology Frustration and Consumer Valuation Shift for Mobile Apps: An Exploratory Study , 2015, AMCIS.

[24]  Thomas Hess,et al.  Understanding the Continuous Use of Fitness Trackers: A Thematic Analysis , 2017, PACIS.

[25]  Dedy Suryadi,et al.  Identifying Sentiment-Dependent Product Features from Online Reviews , 2017 .

[26]  Elgar Fleisch,et al.  Geschäftsmodelle im Internet der Dinge , 2015 .

[27]  M. Porter,et al.  How Smart, Connected Products Are Transforming Competition , 2014 .

[28]  Paolo Sernani,et al.  Exploring the ambient assisted living domain: a systematic review , 2017, J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput..

[29]  Ramesh C. Jain,et al.  Objective Self , 2014, IEEE Multim..

[30]  J. Felix Hampe,et al.  Designing healthy living support: mobile applications added to hybrid (e)Coach solution , 2013 .

[31]  Ali Idri,et al.  A Framework for Evaluating the Software Product Quality of Pregnancy Monitoring Mobile Personal Health Records , 2016, Journal of Medical Systems.

[32]  Bidyut Hazarika,et al.  The Role of Effectiveness, Appeal and Functionality on Evaluation of Health Apps , 2016, AMCIS.

[33]  Kai Petersen,et al.  Worldviews, Research Methods, and their Relationship to Validity in Empirical Software Engineering Research , 2013, 2013 Joint Conference of the 23rd International Workshop on Software Measurement and the 8th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement.

[34]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Use and Adoption Challenges of Wearable Activity Trackers , 2015 .

[35]  Henner Gimpel,et al.  Quantifying the Quantified Self: A Study on the Motivations of Patients to Track Their Own Health , 2013, ICIS.

[36]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  The fine art of user-centered software development , 2014, Software Quality Journal.

[37]  Stefan Poslad,et al.  Ubiquitous Computing: Smart Devices, Environments and Interactions , 2009 .

[38]  Matthew L. Jensen,et al.  Eye of the Blamestorm: An Exploration of User Blame Assessment within Compound Digital Platforms , 2016 .

[39]  Jay Lundell,et al.  Understanding User Experience Journeys for a Smart Watch Device , 2016, HCI.