Cargando…

A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb

BACKGROUND: Attention is turning toward increasing the quality of websites and quality evaluation to attract new users and retain existing users. OBJECTIVE: This scoping study aimed to review and define existing worldwide methodologies and techniques to evaluate websites and provide a framework of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Allison, Rosalie, Hayes, Catherine, McNulty, Cliodna A M, Young, Vicki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6914275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31651406
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14372
_version_ 1783479777805467648
author Allison, Rosalie
Hayes, Catherine
McNulty, Cliodna A M
Young, Vicki
author_facet Allison, Rosalie
Hayes, Catherine
McNulty, Cliodna A M
Young, Vicki
author_sort Allison, Rosalie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Attention is turning toward increasing the quality of websites and quality evaluation to attract new users and retain existing users. OBJECTIVE: This scoping study aimed to review and define existing worldwide methodologies and techniques to evaluate websites and provide a framework of appropriate website attributes that could be applied to any future website evaluations. METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases and gray literature for studies of website evaluation. The results were exported to EndNote software, duplicates were removed, and eligible studies were identified. The results have been presented in narrative form. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extracted data included type of website, aim or purpose of the study, study populations (users and experts), sample size, setting (controlled environment and remotely assessed), website attributes evaluated, process of methodology, and process of analysis. Methods of evaluation varied and included questionnaires, observed website browsing, interviews or focus groups, and Web usage analysis. Evaluations using both users and experts and controlled and remote settings are represented. Website attributes that were examined included usability or ease of use, content, design criteria, functionality, appearance, interactivity, satisfaction, and loyalty. Website evaluation methods should be tailored to the needs of specific websites and individual aims of evaluations. GoodWeb, a website evaluation guide, has been presented with a case scenario. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping study supports the open debate of defining the quality of websites, and there are numerous approaches and models to evaluate it. However, as this study provides a framework of the existing literature of website evaluation, it presents a guide of options for evaluating websites, including which attributes to analyze and options for appropriate methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6914275
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69142752020-01-02 A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb Allison, Rosalie Hayes, Catherine McNulty, Cliodna A M Young, Vicki JMIR Form Res Review BACKGROUND: Attention is turning toward increasing the quality of websites and quality evaluation to attract new users and retain existing users. OBJECTIVE: This scoping study aimed to review and define existing worldwide methodologies and techniques to evaluate websites and provide a framework of appropriate website attributes that could be applied to any future website evaluations. METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases and gray literature for studies of website evaluation. The results were exported to EndNote software, duplicates were removed, and eligible studies were identified. The results have been presented in narrative form. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extracted data included type of website, aim or purpose of the study, study populations (users and experts), sample size, setting (controlled environment and remotely assessed), website attributes evaluated, process of methodology, and process of analysis. Methods of evaluation varied and included questionnaires, observed website browsing, interviews or focus groups, and Web usage analysis. Evaluations using both users and experts and controlled and remote settings are represented. Website attributes that were examined included usability or ease of use, content, design criteria, functionality, appearance, interactivity, satisfaction, and loyalty. Website evaluation methods should be tailored to the needs of specific websites and individual aims of evaluations. GoodWeb, a website evaluation guide, has been presented with a case scenario. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping study supports the open debate of defining the quality of websites, and there are numerous approaches and models to evaluate it. However, as this study provides a framework of the existing literature of website evaluation, it presents a guide of options for evaluating websites, including which attributes to analyze and options for appropriate methods. JMIR Publications 2019-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6914275/ /pubmed/31651406 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14372 Text en ©Rosalie Allison, Catherine Hayes, Cliodna A M McNulty, Vicki Young. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 24.10.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Formative Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://formative.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Review
Allison, Rosalie
Hayes, Catherine
McNulty, Cliodna A M
Young, Vicki
A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title_full A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title_fullStr A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title_full_unstemmed A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title_short A Comprehensive Framework to Evaluate Websites: Literature Review and Development of GoodWeb
title_sort comprehensive framework to evaluate websites: literature review and development of goodweb
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6914275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31651406
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14372
work_keys_str_mv AT allisonrosalie acomprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT hayescatherine acomprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT mcnultycliodnaam acomprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT youngvicki acomprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT allisonrosalie comprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT hayescatherine comprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT mcnultycliodnaam comprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb
AT youngvicki comprehensiveframeworktoevaluatewebsitesliteraturereviewanddevelopmentofgoodweb