Situation:
New Chance Cancer Clinic, operating in the healthcare and non-profit sector, identified a critical need to improve their website's usability and accessibility. The clinic aimed to make navigation and information retrieval more intuitive for individuals at various stages of interaction with breast cancer, including those at high risk, diagnosed patients, and their friends and family.
Task:
The main objective was to overhaul the website’s information architecture to increase the success rate of information retrieval, which was initially only 43%. The project was tasked with designing a more user-friendly website that aligns with the emotional and informational needs of different user groups affected by breast cancer.
Action:
Initial Discovery and Benchmarking (Test existing structure)Utilized Optimal Workshop's Maze tool to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the existing website. The initial tree testing pinpointed critical navigational challenges with a baseline success rate of just 43%. The poor navigation revealed significant obstacles for users to access vital health information efficiently.
An overview of the project and the discovery activities that have happened to gain insights into thenavigation of the New Chance website.
we identified 9 key scenarios whereby people might be looking to find information on the website. We used this document as the basis for a task list, along with a test script which was run with 3 distinct user groups:
​
Group 1
This group includes individuals who are either at risk of breast cancer or have concerns about potentially being diagnosed in the future.
.Group 2
This group consists of individuals who have been officially diagnosed with breast cancer.
Group 3
This group comprises family members and friends of individuals who have been diagnosed with breast cancer, focusing on their specific concerns and informational needs.
For each of the groups, we identified a series of demographics that should be included in the test to make the target groups as diverse as possible.
For the initial round of testing, our goal was to evaluate the performance of the current structure. This served as a baseline to identify and emphasize the areas with the most significant issues.
​
Old Design and Information Hierarchy
I reconstructed the existing information architecture and labels in a distraction Maze environment.
I monitored the time users took to complete tasks and their precise click paths, allowing us to pinpoint exactly where and when they got lost, and if they ultimately succeeded.​
​
The initial test of the existing structure yielded an average success rate of 43%.
Post-task open-ended questions gave us deeper qualitative insights into the users' mental models and enhanced our understanding of the diverse personal journeys of potential site users.
Action:
​
-
User Research Deep Dive:
Segmented the clinic's audience into three primary groups: high-risk individuals, diagnosed patients, and their friends and family. Detailed interviews and surveys were conducted to understand each group's unique informational needs and emotional states. This research helped in tailoring the UX design process to enhance relevance and empathy across the user journey.
​
-
Usability Testing:
Engaged users in in-depth one-on-one sessions to explore their interactions with both the existing and newly proposed website structures. Participants were asked to perform specific tasks while their interactions were monitored. This phase also included card sorting exercises, which helped in understanding how users naturally categorize information, shaping a more intuitive navigation system.
​
Redesigning with Empathy:
Armed with insights from usability testing, the UX team redesigned the website’s information architecture. The new design was structured to mirror the patient journey, from initial concerns to diagnosis, treatment options, and accessing support, ensuring that critical information was easily accessible and logically organized.
​
Prototype Testing and Iteration:
Developed a clickable prototype based on the redesigned architecture. This prototype was tested across diverse user demographics to gauge its effectiveness. Feedback collected was crucial in making iterative improvements, ensuring the interface was not only intuitive but also comforting to users navigating sensitive content. After completing our research phase, we were able to propose, test, and validate our solution.
​
We observed improvements in all the previously Problematic areas:
.Tasks that had the lowest success rates in the initial test,
Task 4 (Awareness materials),
Task 5 (Diagnosis)
Task 10 (Symptoms/side effect management) more than doubled their success rates with the updated information architecture.
. However, the area concerning symptoms/side effect management still posed challenges, as even with improved success rates, fewer than 49% of participants were able to successfully navigate to the correct link.
​
​
Interestingly, our findings revealed that different user groups had distinct expectations about where information should be located. Specifically, those diagnosed with breast cancer (Group 2) experienced lower success rates compared to other groups. Overall, adopting a more logical navigation approach, aligning top-level labels with corresponding stages of the conditions, led to quicker decision-making and higher success rates. Tasks related to symptoms, risks, and treatments were completed much faster in the second round of tree testing and also benefited from higher directness scores, where 84.7% is considered average.
Final Validation Through Advanced Tree Testing:
Conducted a second round of tree testing with the revised website. This step was essential to measure the effectiveness of the redesign, focusing on how quickly and accurately users could find information compared to the initial benchmark.
​
We saw improvements for all 3 user groups:
At Risk (Group 1): 75.1% success . 22.3% failure . 81% directness.
DirectnessDiagnosed (Group 2): 68.34% success . 31.1% failure . 80% directness.
Directness Family & Friends (Group 3): 77.6% success . 23.3% failure . 82% directness.
​​
​
​
Final Validation Through Advanced Tree Testing:
Conducted a second round of tree testing with the revised website. This step was essential to measure the effectiveness of the redesign, focusing on how quickly and accurately users could find information compared to the initial benchmark.
