Skip to main content

Table 3 Users’ preferences for the alternative versions of the revised rapid response brief

From: Policymaker experiences with rapid response briefs to address health-system and technology questions in Uganda

Which participant Preference Explanation why (illustrated with quotes if possible) User experience category
Respondent 1 Version 3 Less crowded face/first page Findability
Respondent 2 Version 2 Version 3 template looks “deficient” and still has no recommendations Usability
Respondent 3 Version 2 Version 2 template is fine so long as you keep the document short Usability
Respondent 4 Version 3 Face page is more attractive – makes the document feel “light Findability