Chapter 4 76 developed this questionnaire based on the usability, satisfaction, and ease-of-use (USE) questionnaire (Lund, 2001); the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) questionnaire (Venkatesh et al., 2003); and the internet evaluation and utility questionnaire (IEUQ) (Ritterband et al., 2008; Thorndike et al., 2008) questionnaires. It comprised 13 questions regarding the intention to use, usefulness, and usability of the design, as well as the relevance, understandability, and trustworthiness of the content. The items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 “certainly not” to 5 “certainly” (Lin et al., 2018). To analyze the questionnaire responses, we calculated the percentages (means and SDs) and classified scores as negative (1 or 2), neutral (3), or positive (4 or 5) for each item (Allen & Seaman, 2007; Jansen-Kosterink et al., 2021). 4.2.3 Data analysis Since this study adopted a participatory approach, we used the data from the first session to develop the prototype and the data from the second session to refine the prototype guide (Lentferink et al., 2020; van Velsen et al., 2018; Wentzel et al., 2014). Thematic analysis was applied to both sets of data, following the method outlined by (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The first authors coded and themed data separately using the qualitative data analysis ATLAS.ti software (version 9; ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH). Themes were coded through open coding and thereafter categorized through axial coding within 3 predetermined categories: service, system, and content, as provided in (Kelders et al., 2013). The system category describes the website’s layout and information structure. The content category describes the usefulness of the information and the understandability of the text on the website. The service category describes the process of care given by the website, including credibility and long-term implementation. We identified recurring themes and items of interest that offered insights into the wishes and needs of professionals. Initial codes and themes were discussed in several sessions, and the results were then compared and merged by consensus. The codes were also given a positive, neutral, negative, and recommendation label. After each interview round, we used the themes resulting from the analysis to synthesize a list of requirements for the next prototype. For this, we examined the frequency of occurrence and the number of participants who mentioned the themes. Positive themes related to aspects that should be kept and elaborated upon. Negative aspects were paired with recommendations for improvement. The requirements were related to content, system, and service and encompassed the most important needs, wishes, and preferences of the participants.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw