1.

1 Functionality
The functionality assessment of the calorie calculator and suggester mobile application

reveals significant insights across different user groups: students, faculty, and IT experts. The

application's ability to accurately record and retrieve user information scored high among all

groups, with means of 4.60 (SD = 0.52) for students, 4.00 (SD = 0.82) for faculty, and 4.67

(SD = 0.58) for IT experts, resulting in an overall mean of 4.40 (SD = 0.66) as indicated in Table

1. This indicates a strong performance in fundamental operational aspects. User-friendliness in

data input was also rated positively, with means ranging from 4.40 (SD = 0.52) for students to

4.67 (SD = 0.58) for IT experts, and an overall mean of 4.45 (SD = 0.50). This suggests that the

interface is intuitive and accessible across user types.

However, the clarity of instructions showed a relatively lower score, especially among

students and faculty, with means of 3.70 (SD = 0.67) and 3.71 (SD = 0.49) respectively,

compared to 4.33 (SD = 0.58) from IT experts. The overall mean here was 3.80 (SD = 0.60),

highlighting a potential area for improvement. The overall functionality assessment yields a

mean of 4.23 (SD = 0.27) for students, 4.05 (SD = 0.36) for faculty, and 4.56 (SD = 0.38) for IT

experts, with a cumulative mean of 4.22 (SD = 0.34). This indicates a generally high level of

satisfaction among all user groups, with particularly noteworthy approval from IT experts.

The implications of these findings are crucial. While the app excels in usability and

accuracy of information processing, it needs to enhance the clarity of its instructions to ensure a

uniformly high user experience across all groups. Enhancing this aspect could lead to wider

acceptance and more effective usage, aligning with the objectives to provide accurate calorie

calculations and healthy meal suggestions, and meeting the ISO/IEC 25010:2011 criteria for

system evaluation, particularly in terms of usability and functional suitability.

Table 1.
Functionality Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

The application's ability to accurately 4.60 (0.52) 4.00 (0.82) 4.67 (0.58) 4.40 (0.66)
record and retrieve user information.

The user-friendliness of the application's 4.40 (0.52) 4.43 (0.53) 4.67 (0.58) 4.45 (0.50)
interface for users to input their data.

The clarity of instructions provided by 3.70 (0.67) 3.71 (0.49) 4.33 (0.58) 3.80 (0.60)
the application on how to use its
features.

Overall 4.23 (0.27) 4.05 (0.36) 4.56 (0.38) 4.22 (0.34)

1.2 Reliability
Table 2 presents the reliability assessment of a calorie calculator and suggester mobile

application, based on responses from three distinct groups: students, faculty, and IT experts, with

an overall category for a combined assessment. The assessment focuses on three key aspects: the

application's capability to handle user data, its data loss prevention safeguards, and the trust in

secure BMI information storage.

 In terms of Application's Data Handling Capacity, the mean scores indicate that students

(M = 4.30, SD = 0.48) and faculty (M = 4.29, SD = 0.76) rated the application's data handling

capacity very similarly, suggesting a high level of confidence in this aspect among these groups.

IT experts, however, rated this aspect lower (M = 3.67, SD = 1.15), indicating a more critical or

cautious view of the application's data handling capabilities. The overall mean (M = 4.20, SD =

0.68) reflects a generally positive perception across all groups.

In terms of Data Loss Prevention Safeguards, the application's safeguards received a high

mean score from IT experts (M = 4.67, SD = 0.58), indicating a strong approval of the security

measures in place. Students and faculty rated it slightly lower (M = 4.10, SD = 0.74; M = 3.86,

SD = 0.69, respectively). The overall mean (M = 4.10, SD = 0.70) suggests that, on average, the

application is seen as secure and reliable in preventing data loss or unauthorized access.

Finally, in terms of Trust in Secure BMI Information Storage, all groups demonstrated a

high level of trust, with students (M = 4.30, SD = 0.67) and the overall category (M = 4.20, SD =

0.68) showing similar levels of confidence. The faculty's trust level was slightly lower (M =

4.14, SD = 0.90), and IT experts gave a perfect score (M = 4, SD = 0), suggesting absolute

confidence in the application's ability to securely store BMI data.

The overall mean scores across all categories (M = 4.17, SD = 0.50) indicate a strong

confidence in the application's reliability. This suggests that the application is well-received in its

ability to handle, secure, and store user data effectively. This positive assessment is crucial, as

reliability and security are key factors that can influence user acceptance and trust in mobile
health applications. This confidence in the app's reliability is essential for its success, as it aligns

with the aims of providing accurate and secure dietary and health management tools.

Table 2.
Reliability Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

The application 's capability to handle a 4.30 (0.48) 4.29 (0.76) 3.67 (1.15) 4.20 (0.68)
high volume of user data without any
data loss.

The application's safeguards in place to 4.10 (0.74) 3.86 (0.69) 4.67 (0.58) 4.10 (0.70)
prevent data loss or unauthorized access.

Level of trust that the application 4.30 (0.67) 4.14 (0.90) 4 (0) 4.20 (0.68)
securely stores your BMI information
and remains accessible whenever you
need to access it to see your progress.

Overall 4.23 (0.52) 4.10 (0.57) 4.11 (0.51) 4.17 (0.50)

1.3 Performance Efficiency
The performance efficiency assessment of the application, as reflected in Table 3,

indicates a generally positive reception across different groups: students, faculty, and IT experts.

In terms of application's Performance in Input/Retrieval, the mean scores indicate a satisfactory

level of efficiency, with IT experts rating it highest (Mean = 3.67, SD = 0.58), followed by

faculty (Mean = 3.57, SD = 0.79), and students (Mean = 3.50, SD = 0.53). The overall mean

score of 3.55 (SD = 0.59) suggests that the application works relatively quickly and without

significant delays.

Regarding Access to Progress Reports, this feature received the highest scores,

particularly from students (Mean = 4.30, SD = 0.48). The overall mean score of 4.20 (SD = 0.60)

implies a strong capability in providing accessible progress reports. Notably, IT experts gave a

unanimous score (Mean = 4, SD = 0), indicating no variation in their responses. Lastly, the

scores are consistent across groups, with an overall mean of 3.65 (SD = 0.57). This suggests that

the application generally operates smoothly, minimizing unnecessary delays or inconveniences.

The overall mean scores for each group (students: 3.83, SD = 0.28; faculty: 3.76, SD =

0.37; IT experts: 3.78, SD = 0.19; overall: 3.80, SD = 0.29) demonstrate a strong performance

efficiency across the board. The findings indicate that the Calorie Calculator and Suggester

Mobile Application is effective in its performance efficiency, a crucial aspect for user satisfaction

and adherence to calorie tracking. The high-rating in-progress report accessibility is particularly

noteworthy, as it enhances user engagement and motivation. The application’s consistent

performance across different user groups and its alignment with key aspects of ISO/IEC

25010:2011 criteria (specifically, performance efficiency) highlight its potential for widespread
acceptance and success. Continued focus on maintaining and improving these aspects will be

vital for ensuring the application's ongoing effectiveness and user satisfaction.

Table 3.
Performance Efficiency Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

The application's performance in terms 3.50 (0.53) 3.57 (0.79) 3.67 (0.58) 3.55 (0.59)
of working quickly and without delays
when you need to input or retrieve
information.

The application's ability to allow you to 4.30 (0.48) 4.14 (0.90) 4 (0) 4.20 (0.60)
access your progress report.

The application 's ability to operate 3.70 (0.67) 3.57 (0.53) 3.67 (0.58) 3.65 (0.57)
smoothly without causing unnecessary
delays or inconveniences.

Overall 3.83 (0.28) 3.76 (0.37) 3.78 (0.19) 3.80 (0.29)

1.4 Compatibility

The compatibility assessment of the calorie calculator and suggester mobile application,

as judged by students, faculty, and IT experts, reveals insightful trends and patterns, crucial for

understanding the application's performance across different user groups as illustrated in Table 4.

Focusing on the ability to access the application on preferred devices, students and IT

experts showed a higher mean score (4.10 and 4.67 respectively) compared to faculty (3.86),

indicating a more favorable perception among these groups. The standard deviation (SD) in this

category was relatively low (0.74, 0.90, and 0.58 for students, faculty, and IT experts,

respectively), suggesting a consistency in responses.

In terms of system compatibility with various cellphones or operating systems, students

again reported a higher mean (4.20), with a slightly lower score from faculty (4.00) and notably

lower from IT experts (3.67). The SDs here (0.79, 0.58, and 0.58) were comparable, indicating a

general agreement among respondents. When assessing compatibility with existing technology at

healthy lifestyle facilities, the scores were more uniform among students and faculty (3.90 and

3.86 respectively), but significantly higher among IT experts (4.67).

Overall, the mean scores across all groups were above 4.0, with the highest overall mean

observed among IT experts (4.33). The overall SD was relatively low (0.41), indicating a broad

consensus among the different groups. These findings suggest that while the application is

generally well-received across different user groups, there are variations in perceptions,

especially between IT experts and other users. This may imply the need for further customization

or optimization to address specific user needs, especially for non-technical users. The consistent
positive response across groups highlights the application's potential for widespread acceptance

and effectiveness in aiding users with their calorie tracking and meal suggestions. This

compatibility strength, crucial for user satisfaction and application success, aligns well with the

goals of ensuring functionality, usability, and maintainability as per the ISO/IEC 25010:2011

criteria.

Table 4.
Compatibility Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

Ability to access the application using 4.10 (0.74) 3.86 (0.90) 4.67 (0.58) 4.10 (0.77)
your preferred device, such as a
smartphone, tablet, or computer.

The system's compatibility with 4.20 (0.79) 4.00 (0.58) 3.67 (0.58) 4.05 (0.67)
different cellphones or operating
systems that you may use.

The compatibility of the application 3.90 (0.57) 3.86 (0.69) 4.67 (0.58) 4 (0.63)
with the existing technology at the
healthy lifestyle facility you visit.

Overall 4.07 (0.41) 3.90 (0.37) 4.33 (0.58) 4.05 (0.41)

1.5 Usability
In interpreting the usability assessment of the calorie calculator and suggester mobile

application according to the APA 7th edition format, several key patterns and trends emerge,

reflecting the application's usability across different user groups: students, faculty, and IT

experts.

In terms of Ease of Use and Navigation, this aspect received varying ratings with the

mean scores being 3.70 (SD = 0.67) for students, 3.71 (SD = 0.49) for faculty, and notably higher

at 4.33 (SD = 0.58) for IT experts. The overall mean score of 3.80 (SD = 0.60) suggests that the

application is reasonably user-friendly, though there is room for improvement, especially for less

tech-savvy users.

When dealing with Understanding of Information and Options, the application scored

relatively high, with students rating it 4.10 (SD = 0.74), faculty at 4 (SD = 0.82), and IT experts

slightly lower at 3.67 (SD = 0.58). The overall mean of 4 (SD = 0.71) indicates that the

application effectively communicates its functionalities and options to users. Regarding

Guidance and Assistance, the ratings for this parameter were 3.80 (SD = 0.63) for students, 4.14

(SD = 0.90) for faculty, and a perfect 4 (SD = 0) from IT experts. The overall mean of 3.95 (SD

= 0.67) highlights the application's capability in providing adequate support and guidance to its

users.

In summary, the overall mean scores (3.87 for students, 3.95 for faculty, and 4 for IT

experts, with an overall mean of 3.92) demonstrate a generally positive reception of the

application's usability across different user demographics. The slightly higher ratings from IT

experts suggest that the application is well-received by those with technical proficiency, while

still being accessible to a broader audience. The small standard deviations indicate consistency in

user experience. The study underscores the importance of designing mobile applications that

cater to a diverse user base. The positive reception across various groups indicates the

application's potential for widespread acceptance and utility in helping users manage their diet

and health. The insights from this usability assessment can guide further refinements to enhance

user experience, particularly for those less familiar with technology, thereby aligning with the

goals of ISO/IEC 25010:2011 criteria in system evaluation.

Table 5.
Usability Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

The ease of use and navigation of the 3.70 (0.67) 3.71 (0.49) 4.33 (0.58) 3.80 (0.60)
application particularly for individuals
who are not tech-savvy.

Ability to understand the information 4.10 (0.74) 4 (0.82) 3.67 (0.58) 4 (0.71)
and options presented by the
application.

The application in terms of providing 3.80 (0.63) 4.14 (0.90) 4 (0) 3.95 (0.67)
guidance or help when you require
assistance.

Overall 3.87 (0.23) 3.95 (0.45) 4 (0.33) 3.92 (0.31)

1.6 Security
The security assessment of the calorie calculator and suggester mobile application is

illustrated in Table 6. In terms of Privacy Protection, the mean scores are relatively high across

all groups, with students rating it the highest (M = 4.40, SD = 0.52), followed by the overall

score (M = 4.20, SD = 0.60), and faculty (M = 4.00, SD = 0.82). IT experts unanimously agreed

(M = 4, SD = 0). This suggests a strong perception of privacy protection, although there's slightly

less confidence among faculty. Focusing on Secure Login Credentials, where it evaluates the

application's requirement for secure login credentials, the overall mean score is slightly lower

(M = 4.10, SD = 0.44) compared to the privacy protection aspect. Students again show higher

confidence (M = 4.20, SD = 0.42), while faculty members are slightly less assured (M = 3.86,

SD = 0.38). IT experts rate it higher (M = 4.33, SD = 0.58), indicating their confidence in the

application's login security.

 Finally, regarding Compliance with Privacy Regulations, where it focuses on compliance

with privacy regulations, the ratings are high across all groups, with the overall mean at 4.45 (SD

= 0.50). Students and faculty have similar perceptions (M = 4.50, SD = 0.53 for students and M

= 4.43, SD = 0.53 for faculty), while IT experts are slightly less but still positively inclined (M =

4.33, SD = 0.58).

The overall security assessment yields a consistent mean score across groups, averaging

at 4.25 (SD = 0.30). This indicates a generally positive perception of the application's security

aspects. These findings are significant in several ways. The high scores across different user

groups highlight the application's strength in security and privacy, a crucial aspect given its

nature and the sensitive data involved. It suggests that the application is likely to meet its

objectives in terms of security and reliability, as outlined in its aims and objectives. However, the

slightly lower scores from faculty in certain aspects could indicate the need for further

enhancement or communication regarding security features. Maintaining high standards in

security and privacy is essential for user trust and satisfaction, directly impacting the

application's acceptance and success.

Table 6.
Security Assessment
Mean (SD)
Statements
Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

Is user’s personal information kept 4.40 (0.52) 4.00 (0.82) 4 (0) 4.20 (0.60)
private and protected from unauthorized
access.

Does the application require secure 4.20 (0.42) 3.86 (0.38) 4.33 (0.58) 4.10 (0.44)
login credentials to ensure only
authorized individuals can access my
records.
Does the application comply with 4.50 (0.53) 4.43 (0.53) 4.33 (0.58) 4.45 (0.50)
privacy regulations to safeguard my
personal information.

Overall 4.37 (0.29) 4.10 (0.32) 4.22 (0.19) 4.25 (0.30)

1.7 Maintainability
The maintainability assessment of the Calorie Calculator and Suggester Mobile

Application, as reflected in Table 7, presents a generally favorable outlook. The table provides

insights into three key areas: perception of the app's update and improvement potential, clarity of

instructions for troubleshooting or maintenance, and confidence in regular updates for optimal

functionality.

First, the Perception of Regular Updates and Improvements. Students rated this highest

with a mean of 4.20 (SD = 0.63), indicating a strong belief in the app's potential for regular

enhancements. Faculty and IT experts scored this at 3.86 (SD = 0.38) and 4.00 (SD = 0.00)
respectively, suggesting a slightly more conservative but still positive view. The overall mean of

4.05 (SD = 0.50) underlines a consensus on the app’s capacity for evolution.

Second, the Clarity of Instructions for Troubleshooting or Maintenance. The scores are

somewhat lower, with students at 3.90 (SD = 0.57), faculty at 3.71 (SD = 0.49), and IT experts at

3.67 (SD = 0.58). The overall mean is 3.80 (SD = 0.51), indicating moderate satisfaction but also

room for improvement in providing clearer guidance for users.

Finally, Confidence in Regular Updates for Optimal Functionality. The highest score

came from students, with a mean of 4.50 (SD = 0.53), reflecting a strong confidence in the app's

ongoing development. Both faculty and IT experts rated this aspect at 4.00 (SD = 0), contributing

to an overall mean of 4.25 (SD = 0.43), suggesting a good level of trust in the app’s maintenance.

The overall means for each group—students (4.20, SD = 0.23), faculty (3.86, SD = 0.18),

IT experts (3.89, SD = 0.19), and the combined average (4.03, SD = 0.26)—highlight a generally

positive reception towards the app’s maintainability aspects. This data is crucial for guiding the

app's future development strategies, emphasizing the need for clear maintenance guidelines and

consistent updates. By addressing these areas, the Calorie Calculator and Suggester Mobile

Application can effectively meet user expectations, thereby enhancing its utility in promoting

healthy lifestyles and achieving ISO/IEC 25010:2011 system evaluation standards. The app’s

potential to provide accurate calorie calculations and suggest healthy meals aligns well with the

positive perceptions of its maintainability, promising a robust and reliable tool for users' dietary

management.

Table 7.
Maintainability Assessment
Statements Mean (SD)
 Students Faculty IT Experts Overall

Perception of the application being 4.20 (0.63) 3.86 (0.38) 4 (0) 4.05 (0.50)
designed to be regularly updated and
improved to meet your healthy lifestyle
needs.

The application in terms of providing 3.90 (0.57) 3.71 (0.49) 3.67 (0.58) 3.80 (0.51)
clear instructions or user guides to assist
with any troubleshooting or
maintenance tasks.

Confidence that the application will be 4.50 (0.53) 4 (0) 4 (0) 4.25 (0.43)
regularly updated and improved to
ensure it continues to work well and
provide the best possible healthy living
experience for you.

Overall 4.20 (0.23) 3.86 (0.18) 3.89 (0.19) 4.03 (0.26)

1.8 Summary Assessment

 Table 8 reveals a comprehensive picture of its strengths and areas for improvement. The

application excels in security (Mean = 4.25), functionality (Mean = 4.22), and reliability (Mean

= 4.17). These high scores, particularly in security, highlight the app's robustness in protecting

user data and providing reliable functionality, which are crucial aspects for any health-related

mobile application. Furthermore, the application shows good performance in compatibility

(Mean = 4.05) and maintainability (Mean = 4.03), suggesting it works well across different

platforms and can be effectively maintained or updated. This is important for user retention and

ensuring a broad user base across various devices.

On the other hand, Usability (Mean = 3.92) and performance efficiency (Mean = 3.80)

received the lowest scores. While still above average, these areas indicate potential user

experience issues. Improving these aspects could enhance user satisfaction and engagement,

making the app more intuitive and faster in delivering calorie suggestions and calculations.

The overall mean (4.06) is reflective of a positive reception. It suggests that, despite some

areas needing improvement, the app is well-received overall, aligning well with the ISO/IEC

25010:2011 criteria. Hence, the application shows significant strengths in essential areas like

security, functionality, and reliability, which are critical for user trust in a health-related app.

However, to maximize its potential and user experience, focusing on enhancing usability and

performance efficiency is recommended. This balanced approach will likely lead to broader

acceptance and more effective assistance in users' dietary management efforts.

Table 8.
Summary Assessment
Indicators Mean SD Rank
Functionality 4.22 0.34 2
Reliability 4.17 0.50 3
Performance Efficiency 3.80 0.29 7
Compatibility 4.05 0.41 4
Usability 3.92 0.31 6
Security 4.25 0.30 1
Maintainability 4.03 0.26 5
Overall 4.06 0.15