## 2 Literature Review
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt}} \hline \hline
**Reference \# 1** & **Objective** & **\#. Of Participants 2** & **Evaluation Method** & **Evaluation Heuristics** & **Smart Watch** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[21]} & Design and evaluation of a smartwatch platform for ICU nurses & \multirow{3}{*}{7} & \multirow{3}{*}{SUS, interviews} & \multirow{3}{*}{Comfort, security, user interface} & \multirow{3}{*}{Unknown} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability of smartwatch-based AF detection system in stroke patients & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[25]} & Usability of short detection system in stroke patients & \multirow{3}{*}{-} & \multirow{3}{*}{Questionnaires} & \multirow{3}{*}{Accuracy, usability, adherence} & \multirow{3}{*}{Unknown} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability of BP on glaucoma patients & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability of ROAMM mobile app for individuals with knee osteoarthritis & \multirow{3}{*}{28} & \multirow{3}{*}{Standardized questionnaire} & \multirow{3}{*}{Satisfaction, usability, compliance} & \multirow{3}{*}{Unknown} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability of pulse irregularities among older participants & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[24]} & Usability of POAMM mobile app for individuals with knee osteoarthritis & \multirow{3}{*}{40} & \multirow{3}{*}{SUS} & \multirow{3}{*}{Rhythm analysis, ease of use, user importance daily activities, comfort, privacy, and associated stress} & \multirow{3}{*}{Unknown} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Users’ perception of Smartwatch for Indonesian customers & \multirow{3}{*}{116} & \multirow{3}{*}{Online survey} & \multirow{3}{*}{Usability, brands, and prices} & \multirow{3}{*}{N/A} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & To identify users’ & \multirow{3}{*}{30} & \multirow{3}{*}{Interim surveys} & \multirow{3}{*}{Info display, control, learnability, interoperability, preference} & \multirow{3}{*}{LG, Sony, Pebble, Samsung Gear, Moto 360} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability evaluation of smartwatch-based eye movement tracking app & \multirow{3}{*}{10} & \multirow{3}{*}{Customized questionnaires} & \multirow{3}{*}{Smartwatch interface} & \multirow{3}{*}{Moto360} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability test of mental health monitoring platform & \multirow{3}{*}{13} & \multirow{3}{*}{SUS} & \multirow{3}{*}{PRISM platform} & \multirow{3}{*}{Samsung Gear} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & Usability evaluation of smartwatches & \multirow{3}{*}{10, 20} & \multirow{3}{*}{Customize Heuristics, SUS} & Self-descritiveness, consistency and standards, aesthetic and minimal design, reduce short-term memory, match between system and real world, error tolerance, privacy, satisfaction, ease of use, features, etc. & \multirow{3}{*}{Fitbit Versa 2 and Charge 5, Samsung Galaxy 4 and 5} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-6}  & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Reference Number. 2 Number of participants who participate in the study.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: A summary of the literature review on usability evaluation of smartwatches. usability of four different smartwatches which includes Samsung Galaxy watch 5, Samsung Galaxy watch 4, Fibit Charge 5, and Fibit Versa 2. Our main contributions are the following:  
* We used two evaluation methods for the usability evaluation of these watches to find the technical, design issues, etc., in the real world. One is heuristic evaluation with customized heuristics, and the other is using the SUS score. The details are provided in Sections 3 and 4. * We developed a total of 11 customized heuristics through a combination of [PERSON]'s heuristics for the user interface evaluation of watches with [PERSON] and [PERSON]'s [27] heuristics, which are specifically utilized for the usability evaluation of wearable devices, i.e., smartwatches. * A total of 10 usability evaluators used the smartwatches for 10 days and completed the customized survey.