Mixed-methods evaluation shows high usability of an audio app for visually impaired adolescents, suggesting enhanced reproductive health literacy.
Background: Visually impaired female adolescents face significant barriers in accessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) information due to inaccessible educational materials and societal stigma. Audio-based mobile applications provide an innovative, inclusive approach to addressing these challenges, enabling the dissemination of reproductive health information tailored to their needs. Objective: This study aimed to design and evaluate the usability of an audio-based mobile application to enhance reproductive health literacy among visually impaired female adolescents in Indonesia. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted, comprising the development of an audio-based mobile app using a user-centred design framework and a usability evaluation involving 15 visually impaired female adolescents aged 15–19 years. Quantitative data were collected using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ), while qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results: The app achieved a mean SUS score of 85.3 (SD = 6.4), indicating excellent usability. The PSSUQ revealed high user satisfaction, with a mean score of 1.9 (SD = 0.4). Qualitative analysis identified three themes: Accessibility and Navigation, Content Relevance and Clarity, and Suggestions for Improvement. Participants appreciated the app’s voice-guided navigation and culturally appropriate content, although recommendations were made to enhance interactivity and customisation features. Conclusion: The audio-based mobile app demonstrated high usability and satisfaction, effectively addressing the SRH education needs of visually impaired female adolescents. Future development should incorporate user feedback to improve navigation and introduce personalised features, ensuring broader accessibility and engagement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haryani et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: