ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2019
User involvement in digital health: Working together to design smart home health technology.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring routine palliative care delivery to inform tailored digitalization approaches - a qualitative interview study.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- New technology must support, not restrict humaneness: a qualitative interview study on the potential influences of a new digital system on specialist palliative home care.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- The sepsis journey and where digital alerts can help: a qualitative, interview study with survivors and family members in England.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
- Roles, outcomes, and enablers within research partnerships: A rapid review of the literature on patient and public involvement and engagement in health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Review
- Digital technologies in routine palliative care delivery: an exploratory qualitative study with health care professionals in Germany.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Chinese adult segmentation according to health skills and analysis of their use for smart home: a cross-sectional national survey.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Engaging patients and citizens in digital health technology development through the virtual space.Frontiers in medical technology · 2022Article
- Consensus on Recommended Functions of a Smart Home System to Improve Self-Management Behaviors in People With Heart Failure: A Modified Delphi Approach.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Involving older adults in technology research and development discussions through dialogue cafés.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
- User involvement in digital health: Working together to design smart home health technology.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic involvement adds value to numerous aspects of health research, yet few studies have attempted to evaluate its impact on research. Evidence of such impact is needed to develop recommendations for best practice and ensure adequate resourcing.
aimTo evaluate public involvement within a large interdisciplinary Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) research project that focused on digital health.
methodsThe evaluation was conducted with members of the project's Public Advisory Groups (PAG) and with researchers who had participated in involvement activities. Two questionnaires were designed based on a public involvement value systems and clusters framework.
resultsResponses from members of the PAG (n = 10) were mostly positive towards normative values, which include moral, ethical and political aspects of involvement in research, and towards values concerning the conduct of public involvement and best practices. Researchers' responses (n = 16) indicated they felt that involvement was generally effective and increased the quality, relevance and generalizability of their work. However, their responses about the validity of involvement in research were varied. They also highlighted several challenges including how well public involvement impacted on research, how decisions made in the research might differ from the views generated from public involvement, and barriers to researchers' participation. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionOur evaluation suggests that members of the public and the researchers value involvement. However, there is a need to consider how to embed public involvement to an even greater extent in STEM contexts and a need to address any barriers for researchers' own involvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.