An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described

Alicia Kilfoy; Ting-Chen Chloe Hsu; Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell; Pauline Whelan; Charlene H. Chu; Lindsay Jibb

doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01385-1

journal article Open Access Dec 23, 2024

An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described

Alicia Kilfoy Ting-Chen Chloe Hsu

Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell Pauline Whelan

Charlene H. Chu Lindsay Jibb

npj Digital Medicine Vol. 7 No. 1 · Springer Science and Business Media LLC

View at Publisher Save 10.1038/s41746-024-01385-1

Abstract

Abstract
Co-design has been suggested to improve intervention effectiveness and sustainability. However, digital health intervention co-design is inconsistently reported. This umbrella review aims to synthesize what is known about co-design of digital health interventions. We searched five databases from inception. Reviews which reported on co-design methodologies used in digital health were eligible. Information on review type, health conditions, and reported specifics of co-design were extracted and synthesized. Methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR2 tool. We included 21 reviews published between 2015 and 2023. Co-design participants included patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals. The frequency and breadth of participant involvement in co-design activities were reported in less than half of reviews. Participants evaluated intervention co-design as a positive process. All reviews were rated as critically low quality. This umbrella review highlights the inconsistent reporting of co-design in digital health. Here, we emphasize the importance of creating guidelines to direct co-design activities.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

70

[1]

Sharma, A. et al. Using digital health technology to better generate evidence and deliver evidence-based care. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 71, 2680–2690 (2018). 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.03.523

[2]

Barriers and facilitators to utilizing digital health technologies by healthcare professionals

Israel Júnior Borges do Nascimento, Hebatullah Abdulazeem, Lenny Thinagaran Vasanthan et al.

npj Digital Medicine 2023 10.1038/s41746-023-00899-4

[3]

Murray, E. et al. Evaluating digital health interventions. Am. J. Prev. Med. 51, 843–851 (2016). 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.008

[4]

The Promise of Digital Health: Then, Now, and the Future

Amy Abernethy, Laura Adams, Meredith Barrett et al.

NAM Perspectives 2022 10.31478/202206e

[5]

Fedele, D. A., Cushing, C. C., Fritz, A., Amaro, C. M. & Ortega, A. Mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth: a meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 171, 461 (2017). 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0042

[6]

Garnett, A., Northwood, M., Ting, J. & Sangrar, R. mHealth interventions to support caregivers of older adults: equity-focused systematic review. JMIR Aging 5, e33085 (2022). 10.2196/33085

[7]

Samadbeik, M., Garavand, A., Aslani, N., Sajedimehr, N. & Fatehi, F. Mobile health interventions for cancer patient education: a scoping review. Int. J. Med. Inform. 179, 105214 (2023). 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105214

[8]

Jibb, L. A. et al. Development of a mHealth real-time pain self-management app for adolescents with cancer: an iterative usability testing study. J. Pediatr. Oncol. Nurs. 34, 283–294 (2017). 10.1177/1043454217697022

[9]

Hunter, J. F. et al. A pilot study of the preliminary efficacy of Pain Buddy: a novel intervention for the management of children’s cancer‐related pain. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 67, e28278 (2020). 10.1002/pbc.28278

[10]

Burke, L. E. et al. Current science on consumer use of mobile health for cardiovascular disease prevention: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 132, 1157–1213 (2015). 10.1161/cir.0000000000000232

[11]

Winters, N., Oliver, M. & Langer, L. Can mobile health training meet the challenge of ‘measuring better’? In Measuring the Unmeasurable in Education (ed. Unterhalter, E.) 115–131 (Routledge, 2020). 10.4324/9780429444494-6

[12]

Malloy, J. A., Partridge, S. R., Kemper, J. A., Braakhuis, A. & Roy, R. Co-design of digital health interventions for young adults: protocol for a scoping review. JMIR Res. Protoc. 11, e38635 (2022). 10.2196/38635

[13]

Noorbergen, T. J., Adam, M. T. P., Teubner, T. & Collins, C. E. Using co-design in mobile health system development: a qualitative study with experts in co-design and mobile health system development. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 9, e27896 (2021). 10.2196/27896

[14]

Moll, S. et al. Are you really doing ‘codesign’? Critical reflections when working with vulnerable populations. BMJ Open 10, e038339 (2020). 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038339

[15]

Baysari, M. T. & Westbrook, J. I. Mobile applications for patient-centered care coordination: a review of human factors methods applied to their design, development, and evaluation. Yearb. Med. Inf. 24, 47–54 (2015). 10.15265/iy-2015-011

[16]

Orlowski, S. K. et al. Participatory research as one piece of the puzzle: a systematic review of consumer involvement in design of technology-based youth mental health and well-being interventions. JMIR Hum. Factors 2, e12 (2015). 10.2196/humanfactors.4361

[17]

The University of Newcastle et al. Co-design in mHealth systems development: insights from a systematic literature review. THCI 13, 175–205 (2021). 10.17705/1thci.00147

[18]

Woods, L., Duff, J., Cummings, E. & Walker, K. Evaluating the development processes of consumer mHealth interventions for chronic condition self-management: a scoping review. Comput. Inform. Nurs. 37, 373–385 (2019).

[19]

Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review

Rebecca Baines, Hannah Bradwell, Katie Edwards et al.

Health Expectations 2022 10.1111/hex.13506

[20]

Bevan Jones, R. et al. Practitioner review: Co‐design of digital mental health technologies with children and young people. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatr. 61, 928–940 (2020). 10.1111/jcpp.13258

[21]

Bird, M. et al. Use of synchronous digital health technologies for the care of children with special health care needs and their families: scoping review. JMIR Pediatr. Parent 2, e15106 (2019). 10.2196/15106

[22]

Cwintal, M. et al. A rapid review for developing a co-design framework for a pediatric surgical communication application. J. Pediatr. Surg. 58, 879–890 (2023). 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.01.030

[23]

Cole, A., Adapa, K., Richardson, D. R. & Mazur, L. M. Co-design approaches involving older adults in the development of electronic healthcare tools: a systematic review. in Studies in Health Technology and Informatics (eds Otero, P., Scott, P., Martin, S. Z. & Huesing, E.) (IOS Press, 2022). 10.3233/shti220293

[24]

Mitchell, K. M., Holtz, B. E. & McCarroll, A. Patient-centered methods for designing and developing health information communication technologies: a systematic review. Telemed. J. E Health 25, 1012–1021 (2019). 10.1089/tmj.2018.0236

[25]

Kip, H. et al. Methods for human-centered eHealth development: narrative scoping review. J. Med. Internet Res. 24, e31858 (2022). 10.2196/31858

[26]

Vandekerckhove, P., De Mul, M., Bramer, W. M. & De Bont, A. A. Generative participatory design methodology to develop electronic health interventions: systematic literature review. J. Med. Internet Res. 22, e13780 (2020). 10.2196/13780

[27]

Øksnebjerg, L., Janbek, J., Woods, B. & Waldemar, G. Assistive technology designed to support self-management of people with dementia: user involvement, dissemination, and adoption. A scoping review. Int. Psychogeriatr. 32, 937–953 (2020). 10.1017/s1041610219001704

[28]

Wegener, E. K., Bergschöld, J. M., Whitmore, C., Winters, M. & Kayser, L. Involving older people with frailty or impairment in the design process of digital health technologies to enable aging in place: scoping review. JMIR Hum. Factors 10, e37785 (2023). 10.2196/37785

[29]

Henni, S. H., Maurud, S., Fuglerud, K. S. & Moen, A. The experiences, needs and barriers of people with impairments related to usability and accessibility of digital health solutions, levels of involvement in the design process and strategies for participatory and universal design: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 22, 35 (2022). 10.1186/s12889-021-12393-1

[30]

Nimmanterdwong, Z., Boonviriya, S. & Tangkijvanich, P. Human-centered design of mobile health apps for older adults: systematic review and narrative synthesis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 10, e29512 (2022). 10.2196/29512

[31]

Nusir, M. & Rekik, M. Systematic review of co-design in digital health for COVID-19 research. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00964-x (2022). 10.1007/s10209-022-00964-x

[32]

Sanz, M. F., Acha, B. V. & García, M. F. Co-design for people-centred care digital solutions: a literature review. Int. J. Integr. Care 21, 16 (2021). 10.5334/ijic.5573

[33]

Sumner, J., Chong, L. S., Bundele, A. & Wei Lim, Y. Co-designing technology for aging in place: a systematic review. Gerontologist 61, e395–e409 (2021). 10.1093/geront/gnaa064

[34]

DeSmet, A. et al. Is participatory design associated with the effectiveness of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion? A meta-analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 18, e94 (2016). 10.2196/jmir.4444

[35]

Eyles, H. et al. Co-design of mHealth delivered interventions: a systematic review to assess key methods and processes. Curr. Nutr. Rep. 5, 160–167 (2016). 10.1007/s13668-016-0165-7

[36]

Vaughn, L. M. & Jacquez, F. Participatory research methods—choice points in the research process. J. Particip. Res. Methods 1, 1–9 (2020). 10.35844/001c.13244

[37]

Lupton, D. Digital health now and in the future: findings from a participatory design stakeholder workshop. Digital Health 3, 205520761774001 (2017). 10.1177/2055207617740018

[38]

Sadek, M., Calvo, R. A. & Mougenot, C. Co-designing conversational agents: a comprehensive review and recommendations for best practices. Des. Stud. 89, 101230 (2023). 10.1016/j.destud.2023.101230

[39]

Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews

Peter Slattery, Alexander K. Saeri, Peter Bragge

Health Research Policy and Systems 2020 10.1186/s12961-020-0528-9

[40]

A review of research with co-design methods in health education

Francisco Iniesto, Koula Charitonos, Allison Littlejohn

Open Education Studies 2022 10.1515/edu-2022-0017

[41]

Chu, C. H. et al. Digital ageism: challenges and opportunities in artificial intelligence for older adults. Gerontologist 62, 947–955 (2022). 10.1093/geront/gnab167

[42]

Voorheis, P., Petch, J., Pham, Q. & Kuluski, K. Maximizing the value of patient and public involvement in the digital health co-design process: a qualitative descriptive study with design leaders and patient-public partners. PLoS Digit. Health 2, e0000213 (2023). 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000213

[43]

Singh, D. R., Sah, R. K., Simkhada, B. & Darwin, Z. Potentials and challenges of using co-design in health services research in low- and middle-income countries. Glob. Health Res. Policy 8, 5 (2023). 10.1186/s41256-023-00290-6

[44]

Sánchez De La Guía, L., Puyuelo Cazorla, M. & de-Miguel-Molina, B. Terms and meanings of “participation” in product design: from “user involvement” to “co-design. Des. J. 20, S4539–S4551 (2017).

[45]

Sanders, E. B.-N. & Stappers, P. J. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4, 5–18 (2008). 10.1080/15710880701875068

[46]

Sanders, L. & Stappers, P. J. From designing to co-designing to collective dreaming: three slices in time. Interactions 21, 24–33 (2014). 10.1145/2670616

[47]

Diaz, T. et al. A call for standardised age-disaggregated health data. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2, e436–e443 (2021). 10.1016/s2666-7568(21)00115-x

[48]

Updated Guidance on the Reporting of Race and Ethnicity in Medical and Science Journals

Annette Flanagin, Tracy Frey, Stacy L. Christiansen

JAMA 10.1001/jama.2021.13304

[49]

Stanbrook, M. B. & Salami, B. CMAJ ’s new guidance on the reporting of race and ethnicity in research articles. CMAJ 195, E236–E238 (2023). 10.1503/cmaj.230144

[50]

Chauhan, A., Leefe, J., Shé, É. N. & Harrison, R. Optimising co-design with ethnic minority consumers. Int. J. Equity Health 20, 240, s12939-021-01579-z (2021). 10.1186/s12939-021-01579-z

Showing 50 of 70 references

Metrics

54

Citations

70

References

Details

Published: Dec 23, 2024
Vol/Issue: 7(1)
License: View

Authors

Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell

P

Pauline Whelan

Digital Research Unit Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust Manchester UK; Centre for Health Informatics University of Manchester Manchester UK

University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Funding

Manchester Melbourne Toronto Joint Research Fund

Cite This Article

Alicia Kilfoy, Ting-Chen Chloe Hsu, Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell, et al. (2024). An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described. npj Digital Medicine, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01385-1

An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described

You May Also Like