## 2 Materials and Methods
### Data Collection and Evaluation
This measure was collected weekly to assess any changes in QoL that may have resulted from using the system and the HRS. The surveys were the following:
* QP1: The TeNDER system has helped me to have information about my health. (1-5)
* QP2: The TeNDER system has helped to improve my autonomy. (1-5)
* QP3: The TeNDER system is a support in my daily life. (1-5)
* QP4: The TeNDER system helps me to improve my self-care (food, physical activity, sleep and rest...). (1-5)
* QP5: The TeNDER system helps me to feel safer and more secure. (1-5)
* QP6: I believe that using the TeNDER system regularly could increase my QoL. (1-5) Additionally, at the end of the four weeks, a final QoL assessment was performed in the context of the use of the RS, which included the following questions:
* Q: Quality of Life. Specifically tackled QoL surveys, but focused on the overall system of the project. * Q1: How would you rate your QoL today, in the context of using the TeNDER system? (0-10)
* Q2: Since you have been using the TeNDER system, you believe that your QoL of life has improved? (Improved/Maintained/Worsened)
* Q3: According to your experience of using the TeNDER System, how does its use influence your QoL? (Open)
* Q4: Would you recommend the use of the TeNDER system to a friend or family member? (Yes/No)
* Q4.2: If NO, ask why? (Open)
* SUS: System Usability Scale. The SUS surveys [40] were designed to evaluate the usability of the HRS and the overall experience of its patients. The surveys included ten questions that were answered on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the most negative and 5 being the most positive response. The SUS questionnaire was evaluated at the end of the four-week pilot period along with the other post-pilot interview questionnaires. * SUS1: I think that I would like to use the recommender frequently. (1-5)
* SUS2: I found the recommender unnecessarily complex. (1-5)
* SUS3: I thought the recommender was easy to use. (1-5)
* SUS4: I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this recommender. (1-5)
* SUS5: I found the various functions in the recommender were well integrated. (1-5)
* SUS6: I thought there was too much inconsistency in the recommender. (1-5)
* SUS7: I would imagine that most people would learn to use the recommender very quickly. (1-5)
* SUS8: I found the recommender very cumbersome to use. (1-5)
* SUS9: I felt very confident using the recommender. (1-5)
* SUS10: I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with the recommender. (1-5)
* R: Recommender Satisfaction Feedback. The objective of this questionnaire was to obtain an assessment from the participants on the degree of satisfaction achieved with the use of RS, as well as to obtain key information that allowed to identify weaknesses in the design and implement improvements in subsequent developments. To this end, two types of questions were prepared, some based on a Likert scale 1-5 that allowed easy assessment of the degree of satisfaction together with other open ques
tions where participants could freely express their feelings, opinions, and comments. The questionnaire consisted of the following questions. * R1: After your experience using the Recommender, how would you rate your satisfaction with it? (1-5)
* R2: Do you find this service helpful in your daily life? (Yes/No). * R2.2: Why? (Open). * R3: What benefits have you found using the recommender? (Open)
* R4: What would you improve about the recommender? (Open)
* R5: What didn't you like about the recommender? (Open)
* R6: Would you recommend this service to others? (Yes/No)
* R6.1: If NO, ask why. (Open)