Abstract

This paper provides the systematic review of health and fitness mobile applications. With the
immense increase in the number of mobile applications, recommending users with right set of
applications is one of the research tasks. Systematic review and usability evaluation can reveal
many features that can be considered for application recommendation to interested users. Health
& Fitness applications are becoming popular among smart phone users day by day. In this paper,
we conduct systematic review of 270 health & fitness mobile applications that are currently
available on the Apple app store and Google play store. We highlight the target consumer
groups, range of features, acquisition costs, prevalence/consumer ranking, the ability to connect
to measurement devices and the connection between acquisition costs and consumer ranking.
Expert based usability evaluation is performed on 25% health & fitness mobile applications
considering the requirements of users aged 50 years or older. The usability of health & fitness
apps for adults and aged 50 or older was moderate to good but this result applied mainly to apps
offering a small range of functions. Multifunctional apps performed considerably worse in terms
of usability. We think that data forwarding options and automated transmission of measured
values to mobile devices will gain more importance in the future.

Introduction

The cell phone is one of the marvelous creations of this age. The best guess till the end of 2015
put the number of mobile applications near 3.3 million (1.5 million for iOS and 1.8 million for
Android) [1]. As of June 2016, Android clients could pick between 2.2 million applications.
Apple's application store remained the second-biggest application store with 2 million accessible
applications [5]. People are using mobile applications and getting benefit in so many ways to
make their life easy and stress free. There are thousands of applications available for health care.
Many of them prove very useful. Some of them take care like a mother. For example an
application Water drink reminder proves very well to remind someone for drinking water in
his busy life. There are many other applications which can assist you, teach you and train you,
refresh or relax you according to your mood.
The quantity of wellbeing and wellness related applications expanded to 70792 for Android and
59000 for iOS [2, 4].

Today life is so busy. We are entirely engaged with our work all the day. We have not enough
time to join any health care centre or gym regularly. A females whether she is house wife or
working woman does not have enough time for health care. Thats the reason the number of
patients with diabetes, high blood pressure, heart diseases, abnormal blood lipid, metabolic
syndrome, breast cancer etc. are increasing day by day. A physical activity helps you live longer
and prevent many chronic diseases. It raises your digestion system and helps you get more fit all
the more effortlessly (or eat more without putting on weight). It likewise lessens stress,
nervousness, and dejection and enhances your state of mind. It keeps up mind work in more
established grown-ups. It assists with absorption and advances consistent solid discharges. It
expands bone thickness. Individuals utilize Health & Fitness and restorative applications since
they need to be their best. They need to accomplish the best time for a run, the best mile time for
a bicycle ride. Individuals track calories and screen nourishment and drink utilization, so they
look and feel their best. What's more, they need the best restorative medications and costs on
remedies. A determination has accumulated through Health & Fitness applications by means of
health groups, savvy watches, telephones and tablets. Health & Fitness applications are for the
most part classes under the areas including health, medicinal, nutrition, stress relief and womens
health [3].

Physical activity improves sleep quality [6].

We have a junk of health related applications. Out of this good applications are not easy to find
which are most suitable for your needs. This problem is solved through Consumer ranking to
some extent. But the problem is still there.

Within the medicinal service area, applications are supporting the administration of diseases, in
this way advancing wellbeing mindfulness and prosperity. As you get more established the
significance of practice expanded. A huge number of applications has been produced to help the
general population in the administration of Wellbeing and Wellness. One explanation behind the
substantial number of Wellbeing and Wellness applications is higher and relentlessly expanding
the constant illnesses, particularly among the general population more seasoned than 50 years.
The high self-treatment potential positively affects the high number of at present accessible
applications.

In Pakistan the usage of mobile applications is increasing day by day. But there is a lack of using
Health & Fitness applications among the older adults aged 50 or more. In Pakistan a wide
number of older adults use the mobile phone just to make a call to someone. They do not use
health related applications due to the lack of mobile usage experience and the other reason is that
there is no consideration of special usability needs of older adults.

In this paper, we carried out an analysis of all presently available health & fitness applications
till July 2016 for both the most popular operating systems i.e. Android and iOS. Our
investigation intended to give a rundown of the quantity of as of late discharged applications.

Be that as it may, a few reviews have demonstrated an absence of acknowledgment and a less
than impressive utilization of inventive versatile advances among this age bunch. A review has
demonstrated that exclusive the 8% of wireless clients between ages 30-49 have wellbeing
applications on their telephone. As one conceivable reason, there is deficient thought of ease of
use necessities of the aged. Their encounters in taking care of cell phones and applications are
much of the time constrained. Restraint edges and passage boundaries are hence especially
articulated among elders. In addition, scholarly and carnal capacities and necessities are
amazingly not the same as those of energetic customers. Consequently, this age gathering would
profit by applications that consider their particular ease of use prerequisites [7].

Objectives

Health & fitness is declining with age. Therefore, the aged are a huge target cluster that could
advantage from health & fitness applications. The overarching goal of this research is as
following:

To provide overview of newly released health & fitness applications by

highlighting features such as target consumer groups, range of features,
acquisition costs, prevalence/consumer ranking, the capability of connection to
 the wearables, and the association between the consumer ranking and
acquisition costs.

To gauge usability of health and fitness applications considering the uncommon

necessities of people aged fifty years or older

To identify the deficiencies of top rated applications so that pure needs oriented
applications can be available which can entirely satisfy the requirements of users.

Methodology

Keeping in mind the end goal to better assess and enumerate usability for the aged people, firstly
we complete a systematic review and afterwards we perform an expert-based usability evaluation
on 25% examples of health & fitness applications presented as of July 2016.

Paper Organization

Experiments

Experiments contain two types of reviews i.e. systematic review of all applications and usability review
of 25 percent of the applications because of complexity of the process involved. Both reviews require
the process of extensive search of applications explained below.

Systematic Review

Application Search and Screening

Health fitness applications are searched using Apple Application Store and Google Play Store for iOS
applications and Android applications respectively. We choose pertinent English catchphrases to search
for applications on both. Phrases like wellbeing, work out, running, strolling, wellness, exercise are
chosen to look for relevant applications. We look into each hit regarding its pertinence to health fitness,
wellbeing and wellness. A careful selection of applications is essential because of the prevailing number
of spam applications. On Google Play Store, no confirmation prerequisites as of now exist for recently
created applications while iOS applications are first inside assessed by an application survey board [7].
Finally, we come up with a set of filtered applications that belong to health fitness domain.
After successful selection of health fitness relevant applications, we identify and define the basic
categories and respective subcategories for the systematic review. This categorization is defined in the
following Table 1.

The structure of Apple and Android app store is different. In some cases, one store provides information
which strongly differs from other. Android app store does not provide information about the language
and ranking of the latest version. On the other hand, Apple app store does not provide information
about the number of downloads. Therefore, we have to apply different approaches to collect and
analyze all the information given by both the app stores.

Table 1: Groups and individual Subgroup/specifications extracted from Health & Fitness applications

Group Subgroup/specifications

Common information
Application name
Application language
Release date /latest update
Available for desktop
Working Framework
Application absolutely for the iOS Working Framework
Application absolutely for the Android Working Framework
Application for both OS available
Application for Windows phone
Developer info

Developer name
Acquisition costs
Exact Value
Freeware
Lite version
Consumer ranking
No. of installations/downloads
Consumer ranking
No. of Consumer ranking
Interfaces

Accessibility of an interface for external sensor

Type of external sensor
Basic Features
Documentation feature
Info feature
Data forwarding
Analysis feature
Recipe
Reminder feature
Recommendation

Tracking Features
Calories
Distance
Duration
Body Fat
Sleep
Speed
Hydration
Idle Time
Steps
Heart Rate
Weight
Supported Activities
Biking/Cycling
Gym Exercises
Running
Walking
Climbing
Coaching/Training
Yoga
GPS
Additional Features
Tracks Mood
Social Network
Tracks Nutrition
Leader board
Music
Camera
Goals
Location
misc.(media lib, photos, contents, browser, internet)
Blue tooth
Near Field Communication
Speech Recognition
 Insights

Target Consumer groups

Search & Screening Approach For iOS Application

As compare to Google PlayStore, Apple App Store gives some better choices for filtering of the search
results. For example in Apple App Store sorting and searching can be done by choosing the categories
and subcategories. Search results can furthermore be sorted by the significance, date of release,
Prevalence and Consumer ranking. For the purpose of analysis we choose the category Health & Fitness.
This is further divided into the subcategories such as fitness, medical, nutrition, stress relief and
womens health. We choose the applications related to all the subcategories and collect all the
information given for those applications. We choose the applications considering the date of release.
The date of release is the main characteristics, for the selection of Health & Fitness related applications
out of this junk. In the Apple App Store the research results were exactly according to the relevant
applications. Furthermore, we checked the applications weather it is available for the iPhone and iPad.
Furthermore, we also checked whether applications solely available for the Working Framework iOS or
Android. We focused on the top paid, top free and newly released applications for our analysis. In this
way we select 117 applications exclusively for the iOS and 100 for both Android and iOS.

Search & Screening Approach for Android Applications

The Google play store does not offer several options to screen the search outcomes for the applications
permitting to specific requirements. Furthermore, the Google play store does not provide the search
results exactly according to the search term. Thus, we use different search terms to detect the required
health and fitness applications. There is thousands of applications available corresponding to the specific
search term. Like the Apple app store we select the top paid, top free and newly released applications
for further analysis. The selected applications are cross checked for accessibility of an iOS version.
Overall, we select 53 applications available for the Working Framework Android.

Expert-Based Usability Assessment

To look at the ease of use of right now accessible applications, we perform an expert-based usability
evaluation. In this methodology, usability specialists analyze the applications as they are impending
users of this application. We include only fully developed applications for this purpose [22] that makes
25% of the total applications selected. The usability specialists are hired for this purpose because of
their exhaustive involvement in dealing with and testing cell phones and mobile applications. The
usability Assessment has been done by an uncommonly made arrangement of usability criteria seeing
connection techniques, interface plan, and comprehensibility of substance (Table 3.2).

Along these lines, we look over the guidelines of usability assessment regard to the necessities of the
elderly people. That are concerned with the mobile applications. Furthermore, the past reviews have
demonstrated the valid requirements for the usability assessment (Table 3.2).The criteria are divided
into main and sub criteria. Further the specific features are clearly explained. A particular assessment
points are explained for all the criteria and sub criteria. The specialists used the Five-point Likert scale
and dichotomous scale for the assessment.

Android and iOS offer dissimilar accessibility features for the people having condensed or partial
intellectual and physical skills. We test these accessibility features for each application in a separate test.
The features are selected that are only related to the elderly people. We also checked that these
features should be offered by both frameworks.

The Invert colors used for the capacity of sufficient color contrast. This feature is measured with
Five-point Likert scale.

The Larger Type used for the capacity of flexibility in the size of images and the other components.
This feature is measured with dichotomous scale.

The Screen reader used the dichotomous scale. It is called voice over in the iOS and talk back in the
Android.

Entirely Android applications were verified on a Samsung Galaxy J7. Entirely iOS applications were
verified on an iPhone 6. If applications were presented for various platforms by the manufacturer, they
were verified on a Samsung Galaxy J7.

The picked strategy offers an abnormal state of legitimacy and likeness because of its rule based
approach and shut reaction classes [25].

Table 2: Estimated usability and assessment criteria for Health & Fitness applications for the ageing.
Main criterion/
Explanation of characteristics Valuation criteria
sub criteria
Comprehensibility

Use of logical semantics

Shirking of remote dialect and specialized terms Five-point Likert scale (1=
Utilization of for the most part logical images and terms not apply; 5=entirely

If essential, provision of supplementary explanations [26] apply)

Simple comprehensibility and interpretability of displayed pictures and delineations

Five-point Likert scale

Clear as crystal pictures and depictions, reasonable without
(1=not apply; 5=entirely
further support and illuminations
apply)

Basic, clear as crystal menu structures

Five-point Likert scale

Effectively coherent and inside predictable menu structures (1=not apply; 5= entirely
apply)

Evasion of solid various leveled menu structures and excessively

numerous functionalities [27]

Presentation (Text&Image)

Palatable shading contrast

Clear, unmistakable hues for pictures and portrayals or decision of Five-point Likert scale
shading nonpartisan delineations (1=not apply; 5=entirely
Prevention of too glaring colors [26] apply)

Substantial size of operating components

Five-point Likert scale

Adequate size of screen and additionally info and yield fields [27] (1=not apply; 5= entirely
apply)

Ability to change the traverse of working components and showed pictures

Ability to alter size of working components and showed pictures as Dichotomous scale
Main criterion/
Explanation of characteristics Valuation criteria
sub criteria
demonstrated by individual needs, capacities, and slants [14,26] (related, not related)

Usability

Direct and easily logical feedback

Instant response to entered data,including effectively justifiable Five-point Likert scale

mistake messages if there should arise an occurrence of wrong (1=not apply; 5=entirely
data input [15] apply)

Instinctive ease of use

Ability to utilize the application without past learning Five-point Likert scale
Ease of learning (1=not apply; 5= entirely

Quick accomplishment of a first sentiment achievement [28] apply)

Basic acknowledgment of snap delicate territories

Straightforward distinction between click-sensitive and non-click- Five-point Likert scale

sensitive areas, likewise without earlier knowledge of the features (1=not apply; 5= entirely
of the touchscreen technology [12] apply)

General characteristics

Extraordinary fault tolerance/effective fault management

Diminishing likelihood of incorrect data contribution by

constraining decision to significant qualities Five-point Likert scale
Proficient editing mode and additionally accommodating client (1=not apply; 5=entirely
feedback, for instance, if there should be an occurrence of apply)
erroneous data input [27]

Password-protected facilities

Prevention of registration at online platforms (however mostly as Dichotomous scale

opposed to information insurance controls) [13] (related, not related)
Results and Analysis

Systematic Review

Search and Screening

Altogether, we analyzed 270 applications amid the survey procedure. Therefore, we made three
informational indexes (Interactive media Reference section 1), which isolated the as of now accessible
Health & Fitness applications into applications accessible solely for the working framework iOS (117
applications), applications accessible only for the working framework Android (53 applications), and
applications accessible for both working frameworks (100 applications).

Yearly Development of Application Releases

The former Health & Fitness application for the operating system iOS (as per Apple Application Store
starting at July 2016) was produced and released on August 19, 2008 (name: Pink Cushion, designer:
alt12). The main Android Health & Fitness application (as indicated by Google Play Store starting at July
2016) took after on January 12, 2012 (name: itriage health, engineers: iTriage). The Health & Fitness
applications released 6 in 2008 and 49 in 2016 (Figure 4.1).

48 49

41 40
Number

31
28 27
24 24 23
19 19 20
17 16 16
13
10 9 10 9
0336 037 0 0 6 4 4 7 8 2

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Year

Android iOS Android & iOS Total

 Figure 4.1 Annual release figures for Health & Fitness applications

Operating Language

The language was English of the dominant part (65.2%, 176/270) of the examined applications.
Particularly the applications related to the Android working framework, (100.0%, 53/53) were in English.
Applications with Multi as working languages were of moderately low number (34.8%, 94/270) (Table
4.1).

Table 4.1 Language of available Health & Fitness applications

Working
Framework
Class Subclass iOS (no=117) Android (no=53) iOS &Android (no=100) Total (no=270)
Language, n (%)
English 79 (67.5) 53 (100.0) 44 (44.0) 176 (65.2)

Multi 38 (32.5) N/A 56 (56.0) 94 (34.8)

Acquisition Costs

Between the two working frameworks, there is emphatically clear difference of the acquisition cost and
free and paid apps(Table 4.2). Android& iOS/Android apps (88.7%, 47/53 and 64.0%, 64/100) were free.
But the (52.1%, 61/117) of the iOS required payment.Some free applications operate through special
test strips and required the measurement devices. They are totally useless without these devices.

The examination of application value circulation uncovered that a more prominent number of free
applications were available over all applications (61.9%, 167/270). This had all the earmarks of being
driven by Android applications where 88.7% (47/53) were free contrasted and 11.3% (6/53) paid. The
switch pattern was observed for iOS where 47.9% (56/117) were free compared and 52.1% (61/117)
paid (Table 4.2).
 The cost of paid applications varied unequivocally between the working frameworks (Figure 4.2). Most
by far (91.3%, 94/103), were in the value range of $0.99 to $5.00. The middle cost shifted among $2.24
and $2.99, depending on the working framework. The applications designed for iOS Working
Frameworks had a tendency to be the applications with the most astounding value level (Figure 4.2).
There is also free and lite versions are available of the applications which are paid and very expensive
(14.0%, 38/270). These lite versions provide the limited functionalities.

Table 4.2 Regard dispersion of uses and yearly extents of free applications since 2008

Working
Framework
Android Total
Class Subclass iOS (no=117) iOS & Android (no=100)
(no=53) (no=270)

Value distribution of Health & Fitness applications and lite version, n (percentage)

Free 56 (47.9) 47 (88.7) 64 (64.0) 167 (61.9)

Paid 61 (52.1) 6 (11.3) 36 (36.0) 103 (38.1)

Paid/Lite Version 19 (16.2) 1 (1.9) 18 (18.0) 38 (14.0)

Development share of free Health & Fitness applications since 2008, n (%)

2016 10/16 (62.5) 30/31 (96.8) 2/2 (100.0) 42/49 (85.7)

2015 13/23 (56.5) 6/8 (75) 5/9 (55.6) 24/40 (60.0)

2014 7/13 (53.8) 4/4 (100.0) 5/7 (71.4) 16/24 (66.7)

2013 11/24 (45.8) 2/4(50.0) 16/20 (80.0) 29/48 (60.4)

2012 7/16 (43.8) 5/6 (83.3) 12/19 (63.2) 24/41 (58.5)

2011 3/10 (30.0) 0/0 (0.0) 9/17 (52.9) 12/27 (44.4)

2010 6/9 (66.7) 0/0 (0.0) 11/19 (57.9) 17/28 (60.7)

2009 3/3 (100.0) 0/0 (0.0) 5/7 (71.4) 8/10 (80.0)

 2008 2/3 (66.7) 0/0 (0.0) 2/3 (66.7) 4/6 (66.7)

25
Minimum First Quartile Median Third Quartile Maximum
20

11.99
15 6.99 8.7
Value

6.99
10
4.99 3.99 4.0
2.99
5 2.24 2.99 2.7
2.99
1.99 2.99 2.3
1.99
0.99 1.99 0.99 1.3
0
iOS Android iOS & Andriod Total
Operating Systems

Figure 4.2 Value distribution of paid Health& Fitness applicationsaccessible as of July2016

Scope of Features

Observing the scope of features of Health & Fitness applications demonstrated that most were
restricted 1-5 features 51/112 (45.5%). Only 37/112 (33.0%) fall into range of 5-10 features. About
15/112 (13.4%) applications have range of 10-15 features and applications that have more than 15
features are offered by 9/112 (8.0%).of the applications available as of July 2016(Table 4.3). Applications
developed for both working frameworks tended to offer a more extensive scope of capacities contrasted
with exclusively for Android and iOS applications.
While analyzing the Health & Fitness applications we track multiple features. That is not lying into one
group. So we divide it into four groups under the following headings (Table 4.3).

Basic features

Tracking features

Supported activities

Additional features

A total of 90/112 80.4% applications and thus the widely held of Health & Fitness applicationsaccessible
as of July 2016 existing tracking and additional features (Figure 4.3). Applications that have basic
features are 84/112 (75%). The minimum number of features provided by the supported activities in
74/112 (66.1%) applications (Figure 4.3).

Basic Features

We group the analysis feature, reminder feature, recipe suggestions, advisory feature and data
forwarding/communication feature under the heading of basic features.

The investigation work opens up the likelihood to dissect the recorded information and to graphically
demonstrate the results (Appendix 2); 46/112 (41.1%) of the Health & Fitness applications offered this
administration (Figure 4.3). It watches out for your advance by reviewing your previous workouts. Some
applications give a point by point details, including pace, distance, duration, calories burn, elevation etc.

The update work helps the Customer to remember its occasional, pre-characterized errands (32.1%,
36/112) (Figure 4.3). It reminds to keep you on track with your practice.

A data sending/correspondence feature was offered by 34/112 (30.4%) applications. With this feature,
the Consumer has the chance to send the recorded data through email to the going to doctor, relatives,
or potentially companions (Appendix 4). The reports can be sent every now and again or on request. A
portion of the applications was associated with extraordinary Health & Fitness applications, forums
where the Consumer scan upload their individual details of exercises and talk about them with others.
Surprisingly, just 27/656 (24.1%) of the Health & Fitness applications gave an advisory feature or
whatever other sort of the proposal (Figure 4.3). Just a set number of applications utilized the
documentedfacts for the recommendations to improve the activity behavior.

Other than the previously described features, 14/112 (12.5%) of the applications involved
recommendations for guidelines reasonable for the requirements of Health & Fitness (Figure 4.3). Daily
supper arrangements and menus including recipes that you can tailor. Some applications give a large
number of sound and simple recipes that help you achieve your sustenance objectives while as yet
eating admirably.

4.1.5.2 Tracking Features

Tracking featurecontains the recording and observing of individuals daily workouts. It track the
frequency of the Consumers stats such as distance, calories, steps, duration, body fat, weight etc.

Calories: this features tracks and monitor your calories burn during your workouts and calories
intake during your daily eating habits. This feature let you tally the calories that you consume
ordinary and also count up the calories you consume, and after that check whether they
balance. Calories are tracked with various fitness trackers. Around 39/112 (34.8%) applications
give this feature (Figure 4.3).

Distance: 36/112 (32.1%) applicationsallow the Consumer togenerate custom splits based on
the distance you want to track (Figure 4.3).

Duration: this feature provides the option to choose the duration and density of each session
during your exercises, running, walking, climbing and cycling. About 20/112 (17.9%) applications
provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Body fat: this feature helps to reduce and track body fat. About 4/112 (3.6%) applications
provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Sleep: this feature helps you to relax, reduce stress and sleep well and wake up rested. It
monitors your activities and determines in which sleep phase you are in. It wakes you when you
are in your lightest rest stage. Around 21/112 (18.8%) applications give this feature (Figure 4.3).
 Speed: Some applications provide this feature to track the speed of running, biking, cycling and
walking. About 14/112 (12.5%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Hydration: it rapidly logs your water intake to ensure you are legitimately hydrated amid
workouts for the duration of the day. Around 8/112 (7.6%) applications give this feature (Figure
4.3).

Idle time: 4/112 (3.6%) applications provide this feature to track the idle time (Figure 3). Which
you spend during your workouts.

Steps: 21/112 (18.8%) of the applications tracks your steps in real-time all day long and
optimized to burn more fat more quickly (Figure 4.3).

Heart rate: monitor and analyze your heart rate zones to adjust your training based on your
goal. About 21/112 (18.8%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Weight: for weight reduction some applications give one of a kind interim arrangements of
running, strolling and sprint intervals for maximum calories burning. Thus, the application
enables the Consumer to screen the weight reduction or weight gain progression. About 46/112
(41.1%) applications give this feature (Figure 4.3).

4.1.5.3 Supported Activities

Biking/cycling: 18/112 (16.1%) applications support this feature (Figure 4.3). Using this feature
you can log and gathers details about cycling and bike rides to see extra time how you are
making strides.

Gym/exercises: using this feature you can get fit and avoid common exercise injuries. You can
learn how exercise the right way, every time. About 24/112 (21.4%) applications provide this
feature (Figure 4.3).

Running: some applications bolster estimations and inspirations you have to run more remote
and speedier than at any other time. Around 30/112 (26.8%) applications give this element
(Figure 4.3).
 Walking: this feature guides and tracks walking for the purpose of fitness and Wight loss. About
25/112 (22.3%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Climbing: this feature tracks and gives you audio feedback to assist you at every mile during
climbing. About 4/112 (3.6%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Coaching/training: most of the Health & Fitness applicationsprovides you training programs and
couching expertise and daily workouts to get you prepared for race, running, yoga, climbing.
Some of the applications give you audio feedback, to assist you at every mile during running,
exercising, climbing and detailed audio instructions for training. About 43/112 (38.4%)
applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Yoga: this feature provides the yoga session, plans and yoga classes with the large databases of
yoga poses and exercises for the fitness, weight loss, strength, flexibility, relaxation, balance,
menstruation and meditation. About 10/112 (8.9%) applications provide this feature (Figure
4.3).

GPS: on each GPS-tracked run and view the course you went up against the guide. Around
25/112 (22.3%) applications give this feature (Figure 4.3).

4.1.5.4 Additional Features

Tracks mood: 13/112 (11.6%) applications give the feature to mark your mood, climate and take
notes about your workouts (Figure 4.3).

Tracks nutrition: some applications use bar code scanner to rapidly track your food. Take control
of your nutrition by interfacing with some applications, for example, MyFitnessPal for a far
reaching take a gander at your calories burn and intake. About 30/112 (26.8%) applications give
this feature (Figure 4.3).

Social network: remain in the know regarding companions and rouse each other. Share your
workouts through Facebook and Twitter. Join challenges to contend with. About 46/112 (41.1%)
applications give this feature (Figure 4.3).
 Leader board: A score board demonstrating the name and current score for the leading rivals.
About 7/112 (6.3%) applications give this feature (Figure 4.3).

Music: music workout application were a hot item in 2015. Audio tracks help to get you flowing
and streaming. Music support to keep you moving at your own beat, during exercise, running,
walking, or for relaxing. Once this feature finds your tempo, it leaves the beats-per-minute
setting alone, so your music becomes a metronome of sorts. RockMyRun has a similar feature,
only the music it plays speeds up and slows down in real time as your cadence changes
[10].About28/112 (25.0%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Camera: this feature take pictures during work out and see pictures online with map trace.
About 8/112 (7.1%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Goals: set personal goals and adapt them as you improve. Reach your running goals with
personal training plans which adapts dynamically to your fitness level as you improve. In some
applications you can also set nutrition goals by grams. About 47/112 (42.0%) applications
provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Locations: 11/112 (9.8%) applications provide location feature, by using this feature you can find
nearby places to run, fitness club, body gym for exercises(Figure 4.3). Some applications also
support to save your favorite paths and add new ones.

Miscellaneous: 9/112 (8.0%) applications use these features like media library, photo gallery,
contents, browsers, internet for proper working (Figure 4.3).

Blue tooth: this feature is used to send data wirelessly from the wearable devices to the
applications. About 9/112 (8.0%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Near field communication (NFC): NFC is a short range wireless connectivity standard that uses
magnetic field induction to enable communication between devices when they are touch
together, or brought within a few centimeter with each other. About 3/112 (2.7%) applications
provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Screen reader: a screen reader is a feature which rather than presenting the contents of
 applications visually, convert text into synthesized speech allowing Consumer toalternatively
listen to content. In iOS this feature is called voice over and in Android it is talk back. About
6/112 (5.4%) applications provide this feature (Figure 4.3).

Insight: this feature uses all that it finds out about your activity, sleep and food to give you deeper
insights and more customized tips to achieve your objective quicker. It sees your meal history initially,
and gets healthful insights. About 10/112 (8.9%) applications give this element (Figure 4.3).

Table 4.3 Number of feature, app ranking and Prevalence/Consumer ranking of Health & Fitness applications as of July
2016

Working
Framework
Android Total
Group Subgroup iOS & Android (no=64)
iOS (no=24) (no=24) (no=112)

Number of feature per Health &Fitness app, n (%)

1-5 feature 12 (50.0) 15 (62.5) 24 (37.5) 51 (45.5)

5-10 feature 11 (45.8) 7 (29.2) 19 (29.7) 37 (33.0)

10-15 feature 1 (4.2) 2 (8.3) 12 (18.8) 15 (13.4)

> 15 feature 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 9 (14.1) 9 (8.0)

ApplicationsRanking, n (%)

4+ 84 (71.8) 50 (94.3) 75 (75.0) 209 (77.4)

9+ 1 (0.9) 1 (1.9) 1 (1.0) 3 (1.1)

12+ 19 (16.2) 2 (3.8) 23 (23.0) 44 (16.3)

17+ 13 (11.1) 0(0.0) 1 (1.0) 14 (5.2)

Prevalence/Consumer ranking

Share of
applications with 113 (96.6) 46 (86.8) 98 (98.0) 257 (95.5)
ranking, n (%)
 Median number of
68 52 171 91
ranking

Median number of
4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
stars (max 5)

100
90 90
90 84
80 74
70
Numbers of Apps

60 56
53
49
50 45

40

30
19 19 18 20
20 16 17
12 14
10

0
Basic Functions Tracking Functions Supported Activities Additional Functions

iOS Andriod iOS & Android Total

Figure 4.3 Range of features of Health & Fitness applicationsaccessible as of July 2016

Targeted Audience

Apple's ranking system for the App Store used the following rubric for the target Consumer groups [11]:

4+: applications in this category contain no objectionable material.

9+: applications in this category may contain mild or infrequent occurrences of cartoon, fantasy
or realistic violence, and mild or infrequent mature, suggestive, or horror-themed content which
may not be suitable for children under the age of 9.

12+: applications in this category may also contain frequent or intense cartoon, fantasy or
 realistic violence, mild or infrequent mature or suggestive themes, mild or infrequent bad
language, and simulated gambling which may not be suitable for children under the age of 12.

17+:we must be at least 17 years old to purchase this app. in this category applications May
contain frequent and intense offensive language, excessive cartoon, fantasy, or realistic
violence, frequent and intense mature, horror, suggestive themes, sexual content, nudity,
alcohol, and drugs, or a combination of any of these factors which are restricted to adults aged
17 or over. No one aged 16 and under is allowed to purchase an app rated 17+

Up until March 17, 2015 Google Play used the following rubric for the target Consumer groups:

Everyone

Low maturity

Medium maturity

High maturity

We use the apples app ranking system to identify the target Consumer groups. The vast majority
209/270 (77.4%) of the examined applications were designed specifically for 4+ Consumer groups,
44/270 (16.3%) applications addressed for 12+ Consumer groups, and only 3/270 (1.1%), 14/270 (5.2%)
were specifically designed for the 9+ and 17+ Consumer group.

Popularity and User Ratings

Consumer ranking are a very important and practical assessment of the extra advantages of
applications. In the Apple application store the ranking of current release/version is accessible and in the
Google Play Store the average ranking of the considerable number of renditions is accessible. So we take
after the present release ranking exclusively for the iOS applications and average ranking only for the
Android applications. We used the present release ranking for applications developed for both working
framework Android and iOS. It is therefore surprising that 113/117 (96.6%) of the applications designed
only for iOS were evaluated by clients. On examination, 46/53 (86.8%) of the Android applications and
98/100 (98.0%) of the applications running on both working frameworks were rated (Table 4.4).
The middle of the amount of gave ranking varied between 52 (Android applications) and 171 ranking
(iOS and iOS/Android applications). With a greatest of five stars for an application evaluation, the center
positioning is 4.5 stars for (iOS, Android and iOS/Android) applications (Table 4.4).Thus, 58.8% (151/257)
of the Health & Fitness applications earned ranking of 4.5 to 5.0 stars, relating to a direct to great
ranking.

Association between User Rating and Acquisition Costs

Throughout the examination, the query emerged of whether there is an association between the cost of
an application and the glassy of client correlation. The outcomes exhibited that there existed a positive
relationship between the obtaining costs and the quantity of given stars, at the cost extent of $0.99 to
$2.99. In the event that the cost surpassed $3.99, the correlation tended to inverse and the applications
got more terrible assessments. In any case, compared with free applications, there is nostrongvariances.

As a rule, free applications were evaluated more much of the time than paid applications. With a share
of 80.1% (121/151), they got the most astounding number of given Assessments from 4.5 to 5.0 when
contrasted with only 19.9% (30/151; value range: $0.99 to $11.99) of the paid applications. In any case,
it must be viewed that free applications were more as compare to the number of paid applications.

4.1.8 Availability of Interfaces to External Devices/Sensors

As opposed to our early expectations, a larger part of Health & Fitness applications had an interface to
an outside sensor or a determining device (e.g., bar code scanner log calories, heart rate monitor,
pedometer for step counting, accelerometer for running, walking, and body scale for weight loss).
Overwhelmingly, applications developed for both working frameworks could interface with an outer
sensor/device (42.0%, 47/112). Once in a while, iOS applications (25%, 6/24) offered this feature
compared to Android applications (29.2%, 7/24).

A portion of the applications, for example, "MyFitnessPal" effortlessly interfaces and consistent
incorporates with more than 50 applications and devices including Apple Health, Fitbit, Jawbone UP,
Garmin, MapMyFitness, Runkeeper, Strava, Runtastic, Maverick, Withings, and that's only the tip of the
iceberg. It works with practically every fitness application and device. The majority of the applications
utilize your phone's GPS to map your routes. Some applications, for example, "Fitbit
trackers"synchronize your details to PCs and 200+ leading devices so you can ceaselessly keep tabs on
your development without expecting to connect to.

4.2 Expert-Based Usability Assessment

Altogether, we assessed 67 out of 270 Health & Fitness applications in the usability Assessment
(Appendix 6) 21 applications accessible solely for the working framework iOS, 14 applications accessible
only for the working framework Android, and 32 applications accessible for both working frameworks.

For all primary and sub criteria, we found the middle value of the assessments of each of the three
specialists. The estimations of the primary criteria speak to the mean of the relating sub criteria (Table
4.4). The aggregate usability score was computed from all classifications, which were dictated by
method for a Five-point Likert scale.

Breaking down the outcomes, the greater part of Assessments were in the scope of 3.0 to 4.0 which
compared to a direct to good ranking of the applications incorporated into the 25% sample. All tried
applications got the best appraising for the sub criteria "simple comprehensibility and interpretability of
displayed images" with an aggregate normal estimation of 4.27(Table 4.4). Autonomous of the working
framework, all applications got the most exceedingly terrible ranking for the sub criterion "fault
tolerance (2.96) followed by Big size of operanking elements (3.28). The values determined for all
other sub criteria fluctuated in the vicinity of 3.2 and 3.9. Looking at the aggregate convenience score
between the diverse working frameworks, we found no reasonable contrasts with qualities fluctuating in
the vicinity of 3.3 and 3.4 for both iOS/Android applications. The most noticeably bad appraised
application with a convenience score of 2.8 was "Running and Walking" (developer: Endomondo) for
both (Android& iOS) and "Zova" (developer: Zova) for iOS (Appendix 6). The best-rated application
was"iTrackBites" (developer: EllisaApps) for both (Android& iOS). Which has the score of 4.3. The 26.8%
of the applications provide the password protected services.

In the second run, we assessed the three picked accessibility features. The most astounding qualities
were noticeable for the screen reader features Voice over (iOS) and Talkback (Android); 17 (80.9%) of
the 21 iOS applications offered the capacity to read the screen content so anyone might hear contrasted
with 9 (%64.2) of the 14 Android applications, and 28 (%87.5) of the 32 applications intended for both
working frameworks. The feature "invert colors" demonstrated no significant change of shading
 complexity contrasted with the consequences of our assessment without testing this element. While
9/21 (42.8%) of the iOS applications offered "large type" feature, 4/14 (40.7%) Android applications
offered substance in substantial text style (Table 4.4).

While directing our systematic review, we guessed that usability diminishes with an expanding number
of features. Henceforth, we furthermore examined the relationship between the principle convenience
criteria and the quantity of capacities by leading a few connection examinations. The outcomes
appeared in Table 4.5 show measurably huge negative connections between number of features and all
usability criteria, aside from "Presentation". Therefore, the number of features and all usability criteria
were essentially negative related to coefficients differing amongst . 074 and- .156 involving that Health
& Fitness applications offering a more extensive scope of capacities performed worse in terms of
usability. Along these lines, we conducted the multiple linear regression analysis to control for
possibleconfusingbelonging to the other features of the similar application (Table 4.6). It indicated
critical outcomes just for two sorts of capacities. The nearness of a basic feature lessened the usability
score overall by 0.05 focuses while the convenience score of applications offering an supported activities
was by and large diminished by 0.06 focuses. As indicated by R2, 13% of the change of the usability
score was clarified by the model All connection and relapse investigations examinations were driven
with the measurable programming "Stata 11.1".

Table 4.4 Usability scores from specialist based ease of usability by working framework, appeared as
mean values.

Working
Framework
Main Criteria Sub Criteria iOS &
Android Total
Android
iOS (no=21) (no=14) (no=67)
(no=32)
Mean (SD)

Comprehensibility 4.04 (0.34) 4.15(0.19) 3.95 (0.18) 4.02(0.25)

Utilization of intelligent semantics 4.05 (0.67) 4.07(0.73) 3.69 (0.64) 3.88(0.68)

Basic conceivability and
4.14 (0.72) 4.21(0.80) 4.38 (0.70) 4.27(0.73)
interpretability of showed pictures
 and portrayals

General, clear as crystal menu

3.9 (0.83) 4.21(0.57) 3.78(0.706) 3.91(0.73)
structures
Presentation (
3.34 (0.8) 3.1 (0.50) 3.47 (0.54) 3.35(0.63)
Text&Image)
Adequate shading contrast 3.29 (1.19) 3 (1.04) 3.47 (0.98) 3.31(1.06)
Sufficient color contrast with
3.33 (1.02) 3.5 (1.02) 3.53 (1.02) 3.46 (1.0)
accessibility feature invert Color
Big size of operating elements 3.38 (1.12) 2.79(0.89) 3.44 (0.91) 3.28(0.99)
Capacity to adjust the span of working
components and showed pictures, n 14 (66.7%) 8 (57.1%) 25 (78.1%) 47(70.1%)
(%)
Capacity to adjust the measure of
working components and showed
9 (42.8%) 4 (28.5%) 21 (65.6%) 34(50.7%)
pictures with availability highlight
"extensive type"a, n (%)
Usability 3.57 (0.28) 3.64(0.42) 3.49 (0.30) 3.54(0.32)
Moment and effectively legitimate
3.67 (0.73) 3.71(0.61) 3.47 (0.57) 3.58(0.63)
input
Instinctive usability 3.43 (0.50) 3.43(0.51) 3.5 (0.57) 3.46(0.53)
Basic acknowledgment of snap touchy
3.62 (0.59) 3.79(0.58) 3.5 (0.62) 3.6 (0.60)
regions
Accessibility Features: Voice over
17 (80.9%) 9 (%64.2) 28 (%87.5) 54(80.5%)
(iOS), Talkback (Android) a, n (%)
Basicfeatures 2.71 (0.64) 2.86(0.77) 3.16 (0.95) 2.96(0.84)
Fault tolerance/Efficient fault
2.71 (0.64) 2.86(0.77) 3.16 (0.95) 2.96(0.84)
management
Password-protected services, n (%) 6 (28.5%) 2 (14.2%) 10 (31.2%) 18(26.8%)
 Table 4.5 Spearmans rank correlation coefficients relating number of features with main usability
criteria scores.

Main usability criteria scores

No. of features
Comprehensibility Presentation Usability Fault tolerance

1 .056* (P=.o.65) .17* (P=.16) .16* (P=.20) .07* (P=.55)

Table 4.6Relationship between usability score and features using multiple regression analysis

Variable Coefficient (b) 95% CI t P

Basic features -.05 -.13 to 0.03 -1.18 0.244

Tracking Features .020 -.02 to 0.06 1.03 0.307

Supported Activities -.06 -.11 to -.02 -2.90 0.005

Variable Coefficient (b) 95% CI t P

Additional Features .046 -.01 to 0.10 1.73 0.089

Intercept 3.51 3.4 to 3.7 43.89 0.000

no=67 F4,62=2.33 R2=.13

DISCUSSION

Systematic Review

The systematic review demonstrated that a vast number of Health & Fitness applications are accessible.
Providers might enter the market therefore of the rising number of diseases because of the absence of
Health & Fitness mindfulness. For clients, it turns out to be progressively hard to discover an application
in this plenty of alternatives that is appropriate for one's own needs. This issue is brought on by an
absence of effective search criteria and filter features in the application stores. All the more every now
and again, applications are picked that seem first in the indexed lists for Health & Fitness applications.
The sorting criteria in the application stores are not obvious. New applications from moderately obscure
developers could experience issues being recorded among the primary outcomes.

In the meantime, numerous applications offered comparable features, for the most part a Tracking
features and additional feature. Contrasts were discovered for the most part in the plan and the menu
structure. Furthermore, the larger part of Health & Fitness applications offered limited features. Multi-
functional application would have a reasonable extra advantage, particularly for recent clients. In the
meantime, simple, justifiable outline, substance, and menu route are required. Be that as it may, a few
applications demonstrated an absence of suitability and usability for its fundamental target group.

5.2 Expert-Based Usability Assessment

As a supplement to our systematic review, we conducted an expert-based usability Assessment to look

at the convenience of as of now accessible Health & Fitness applications for adults and aged fifty or
older. The outcomes demonstrate direct to great assessments (extend 3.0-4.0) for all reviewed usability
criteria. An exemption was "fault tolerance" (Table 5.1). The main criteria, "comprehensibility",
evaluated best with a score of 4.2. Specifically, the aged advantage from easy, justifiable semantics and
simple, intelligible, and interpret-able images and portrayals, because of their as often as possible
constrained involvement in dealing with cell phones and applications. Consequently, it can bring down
inhibition thresholds, particularly amid the first run through of utilization, and hence increment
acknowledgment among this age gather. The same is valid for the impact of "effortlessly justifiable
input" (3.6) and an "intuitive usability" (3.5) (main criterion usability). Be that as it may, these two sub
criteria performed more awful inside our assessment. The way that a large portion of the Health &
Fitness applications were in English or contained English/remote dialect terms (Table 5.2) decreased the
usability particularly for non-English-talking aged as far as intelligibility. This can be viewed as one
improvement approach for future application advancement that is similarly simple to actualize.

The Assessment demonstrated direct outcomes for the main criterion presentation (3.4). Our trial of
three availability highlights showed a decent operability of the screen readers, particularly for Voice
over (80.9%) offered by iOS. Be that as it may, the operability of the elements "invert colors" (3.5) and
"large type" (70.1%) was somewhat limited. Also, the minority of Health & Fitness applications (17.8% of
the iOS applications) were produced particularly for tablet PCs. Be that as it may, we assess them as
more appropriate and easy to understand for aged clients because of their bigger show and greater
representations. With expanding age, intellectual and physical aptitudes are declining, for example,
vision, visual keenness, shading vision, differentiate location, and hearing [11]. Particularly aged clients
are frequently experiencing retinopathy. Inadequacies of Health & Fitness applications concerning the
introduction of data (color contrast, size of operating elements, option to flexibly adapt size of operating
elements, and so forth.) and the operability of openness elements are preventing conceivably intrigued
clients from utilizing Health & Fitness applications from the start. Thusly, an obstruction free get to is a
fundamental essential for aged clients to make them utilize Health & Fitness applications. Against this
foundation, the various criteria we decided happen to auxiliary significance as far as ease of use.

The criterion` "fault tolerance" evaluated most noticeably bad with a score of 2.9 (Table 6). This implies
the accessible Health & Fitness applications were inadequate with regards to an effective blame
administration (criterion specified in Table 2). Particularly unpracticed (aged) clients frequently
experience issues with contributing information. A few blunders are unrecoverable or even cause the
application to close down.
Our relationship and relapse examinations showed a solid connection amongst usability and the number
and kind of features. Specifically, the number of features and all main usability criteria were altogether
negative connected. These outcomes cast an alternate light on the previously mentioned results of our
convenience test. Thus, the direct to great convenience scores connected principally to applications
offering a little scope of capacities. This connection upset when we looked upon the impressively bring
down convenience scores for multifunctional applications (Appendix 6). Considering the uncommon
needs of aged clients, they would profit by a far reaching and effectively justifiable support as of now
said above.

Inside and out, the capability of Health & Fitness applications for helping and supporting clients matured
50 or more seasoned is substantial. Specifically, the objective gathering matured in the vicinity of 50 and
60 years holds extraordinary potential as individuals of this age are as of now very acquainted with cell
phones and applications [29]. Presently, application designers are confronting the test of assessing the
convenience criteria we inspected and tending to those deficiencies. There is no requirement for a
colossal number of new application capacities. It is more about enhancing what as of now exists.

FUTURE WORK

We lead the systematic review and the specialist-based usability test inside the report. In the
report, we research the question: In what way should a mobile app be developed which can
identify current physical condition and recommend effective set of plans for adults and aged fifty
or older? Inside guided meetings, we examined the ebb and flow utilize, acknowledgment
advancing/restraining variables, conceivably required support, and solid outline highlights for the
improvement of a Health & Fitness applications. in this report the Consumer based usability
Assessment cannot be conducted due some limitations such as lake of interest in mobile
applications, do not have sufficient awareness, internet availability etc. in the next step aged 50
or older should be focused purely. Because the aged people faced more fitness problems. The
survey will be conducted to identify the deficiencies of top rated applications and reports to the
developers of that applications so that pure needs oriented applications can be available.
According to the results of systematic review and the survey the app will be developed which
can entirely satisfy the requirements of adults and aged 50 or older. The Consumers and
expertise should be involved from the beginning to satisfy the usability and needs orientation.
Consumer andspecialist based usability Assessment will be performed on regular basis. The
outcomes are combinedconstantly in the app optimization till its completion.
Limitations

7.1.1 Systematic Review

The directedassessment concentrated solely on applications on behalf ofpresentlyprominent
working frameworks, Android and iOS. As of now accessible Health & Fitness applications for
other working frameworks, for example, Windows Phone, Blackberry OS, or Symbian, were not
measured inside the investigation. The application production date was exclusively accessible for
iOS applications, however not for Android applications. Here, the date of the last upgrade served
as reference value. Because of that reality, the outcomes regarding the every year new released
Health & Fitness applications were not openlyequivalent.
The application information was accumulated by concentrate the depictions in the application
stores and inside the application itself. More detailed information, for example, download
statistics, and were not accessible for analysis. Maybe this information would empower more
nitty gritty outcomes concerning the Consumer groups, for instance, differentiated by gender,
age gatherings, or sort of Health & Fitness applications.

7.1.2Specialist-Based Usability Assessment

Inside our usability Assessment, we explored usability criteria solely. We evaluated neither the
nature of substance and capacities nor their adequacy. Besides, it must be specified that one
usability Assessment can't claim to cover all conceivable and basic utilization circumstances that
can happen.

We would likewise stretch that we analyzed a sample of all accessible Health & Fitness
applications, not only an example of applications grew particularly for the aged. Henceforth, a
hefty portion of the applications we assessed don't claim to be especially appropriate for this age
group.
7.2 Conclusions

Regardless of the vastnumber of presentlyobtainable Health & Fitness applications, the greater
part of them offer few comparable functionalities. For the development of a comprehensive and a
complete needs oriented applications the persons related to the application such as consumer and
expertise should be involved. We surmise that information sending alternatives and
computerized communication of measured qualities to cell phones will acquire significance later
on.

The usability of Health & Fitness applications for adults and matured fifty or older was moderate
to good. In any case, this outcome connected mostly to applications proposing a little scope of
features. Multi-functional applications performed impressively worse in terms of usability.
Varied by features. The operability of availability elements for Health & Fitness applications was
very restricted, aside from the component "screen reader".

References:
1. Gmez, M., Adams, B., Walid, M., Monperrus, M. and Rouvoy, R., 2017. App Store 2.0:
From Crowd Information to Actionable Feedback in Mobile Ecosystems. IEEE Software-
Theme Issue on Crowd sourcing for Software Engineering.
2. Mani, Madhavan, et al. "Review and evaluation of mindfulness-based iPhone
apps." Journal of Medical Internet Research mHealth and uHealth 3.3 (2015).
3. Mani, Madhavan, et al. "Review and evaluation of mindfulness-based iPhone
apps." Journal of Medical Internet Research mHealth and uHealth 3.3 (2015).
4. Bari, Emeses, et al. "Software Crowd sourcing Practices and Research
Directions." Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), 2016 IEEE Symposium on.
IEEE, 2016.
5. Bari, Emeses, et al. "Software Crowd sourcing Practices and Research
Directions." Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), 2016 IEEE Symposium on.
IEEE, 2016.
6. Gretton, C., and M. Honey man. "The digital revolution: eight technologies that will
change health and care." The Kings Fund. Available at (2016).
7. Koblenz-Gabriel, Lena. Rating the Rating Systems: A Comparison of Media Rating
Systems worldwide. MS thesis. University of Twenty, 2016.
8. Lee, Young Seok. Older adults user experiences with mobile phones: identification of
user clusters and user requirements. Diss. 2007
9. Theiler, Adam D. "The internet of things and wearable technology: Addressing privacy
and security concerns without derailing innovation." (2015).
10. Elias, J. "In 2016, users will trust health apps more than their doctors." (2015).
11. Roberts, Richard, et al. "Optical and radiocarbon dating at Jimmies rock shelter in
northern Australia." Nature 393.6683 (1998): 358-362.
12. Chen, Amy Y., Ahmedin Jamal, and Elizabeth M. Ward. "Increasing incidence of
differentiated thyroid cancer in the United States, 19882005." Cancer115.16 (2009):
3801-3807.
13. Zajicek, Mary, and Stephen Brewster. "Design principles to support older adults." (2004):
111-113. (Goodman, Brewster, & Gray, 2004).
14. Hutt, Michael D., and Thomas W. Speh. "Edition: Business Marketing
Management." South-Western Publishing Company (2005).
15. Sardonic, Florien, and Henning Brau. Methoden der Usability Evaluation:
Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und praktische Anwendung. Huber, 2006.
16. Abras, Chadia, Diane Maloney-Krichmar, and Jenny Preece. "User-centered
design." Bainbridge, W. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications 37.4 (2004): 445-456.
17. Barnum, Carol M. "Usability Testing Essentials: Ready, Set.... Test!(Barnum, CM;
2011)[Book Review]." IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 54.3 (2011):
336-337.
18. Abascal, Julio, et al. "An expert-based usability evaluation of the EvalAccess web
service." HCI related papers of Interaccin 2004 (2006): 1-17.
19. Mallenius, Seppo, Matti Rossi, and Virpi Kristina Tuunainen. "Factors affecting the
adoption and use of mobile devices and services by elderly peopleresults from a pilot
study." 6th Annual Global Mobility Roundtable 31 (2007): 12.
20. Schemed, A., Drfler, I., Deny, F. and Bpple, O., 2012. Analyse der Akzeptanzkriterien
fr mobile Anwendungen im Bereich Gesundheit in der Zielgruppe
50+. Technologiegesttzte Dienstleistungsinnovation der Gesundheitswirtschaft.
Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler, pp.57-82.
21. Banse, M. "Software ergonomist Optimierung Touch screen basierter Mensch-Computer-
Interaktion. 2008." URL: http://touchscreen-usability. com/[accessed 2014-02-07][Web
Site Cache] (2015).
22. Arnold, M., Quad, M. and Kerch, W., 2014. Mobile applications for diabetics: a
systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation considering the special
requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older. Journal of medical Internet
research, 16(4).