| Literature DB >> 30791577 |
Diego Mayordomo-Martínez1, Juan M Carrillo-de-Gea2, Ginés García-Mateos3, José A García-Berná4, José Luis Fernández-Alemán5, Saúl Rosero-López6, Salvador Parada-Sarabia7, Manuel García-Hernández8.
Abstract
People with motor disabilities must face many barriers and obstacles in their daily lives, making it difficult to perform everyday tasks. The purpose of this work is to improve their living conditions by providing an app with accessibility information in an updated, reliable and friendly form. The development of the system integrates national and regional accessibility regulations, architectural aspects, with an extensive field work, and a sustainable software process. The levels of accessibility and the requirements of the application are defined in the first phases of the project. The field work included the evaluation of 357 commercial establishments in the city of Murcia, Spain, showing that only 25% have a good accessibility, 40% are practicable with help, and 35% are inaccessible shops. The proposed system achieves its objectives of being sustainable and helping in the accessibility. Besides, the system can be a great incentive for businesses to improve their accessibility conditions. In conclusion, new technologies must have a much more active role in the promotion of universal accessibility. These tools must also consider the necessary requirements of sustainable development.Entities:
Keywords: accessibility; motor disability; new technologies; sustainable app development
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30791577 PMCID: PMC6406930 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16040620
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Summary of the levels of accessibility to the buildings defined in this research.
| Code | Name | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| A | Accessible | Access at street level, or through a ramp with maximum slope of 8%, or a step up to 1 cm. |
| B | Accessible with difficulty | Access with a ramp of 10% slope or less, or a step up to 5 cm overcome with a ramp of 25% slope or less. |
| C | Practicable with help | Access with a ramp with 12% slope or less, or a step up to 12 cm alone or with a ramp of 30% slope or less, or a step up to 3 cm round or beveled. |
| D | Not accessible | The rest of the cases. |
Figure 1Satellite image of the city of Murcia, Spain. The area studied in the fieldwork is marked in red. Source: Google Earth.
Figure 2Samples of the four levels of accessibility found in the field study. (a) A store with accessible entrance. (b) An entrance accessible with some difficulty. (c) An entrance that can be accessed with the help of other people. (d) A not accessible entrance.
Figure 3Use case diagram for the unregistered user.
Figure 4Entity-relationship diagram of the information stored in the database.
Figure 5Navigation diagram of the app, corresponding to the role of unregistered user.
Figure 6Different views of the app. (a) Initial screen. (b) Menu options for unregistered user. (c) Menu options for registered user. (d) Menu options for administrator user.
Figure 7Different views of the app related to the search. (a) Search screen. (b) Search results after selecting a mark. (c) Shop details for an unregistered user. (d) Shop details for a registered user.
Cognitive walkthrough evaluation of the app ACCEDE Murcia.
| Question | Evaluator A | Evaluator B |
|---|---|---|
| Did you find the shop of your interest? | 4 | 4 |
| Did you find shop alternatives? | 3 | 4 |
| Were the entrance of the shop as it appears in the app? | 4 | 4 |
| Were you able to find other information regarding the shop? | 5 | 4 |
| Was it easy to find a shop in the app? | 4 | 4 |
| Was it comfortable to search for information in the app? | 3 | 4 |
| Did you find all the information you need concerning access to the shop? | 2 | 3 |
| Were you able to register your profile? | 4 | 5 |
| Were you able to send suggestions? | 4 | 5 |
Usability principles by Dix usability evaluation.
| Usability Principles by Dix | Evaluator A | Evaluator B |
|---|---|---|
| Predictability | 5 | 5 |
| Synthesizability | 4 | 4 |
| Familiarity | 4 | 4 |
| Generalizability | 4 | 5 |
| Consistency | 5 | 4 |
| Dialog initiative | 4 | 3 |
| Multi-threading | 2 | 3 |
| Task migratability | 3 | 3 |
| Substitutivity | 2 | 2 |
| Customizability | 1 | 1 |
| Observability | 3 | 4 |
| Recoverability | 4 | 4 |
| Responsiveness | 4 | 5 |
| Task conformance | 5 | 3 |