Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684404›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2018

Developing Technology to Mobilize Personal Strengths in People with Chronic Illness: Positive Codesign Approach.

Jelena Mirkovic, Stian Jessen, Olöf Birna Kristjansdottir, Tonje Krogseth, Absera Teshome Koricho, Cornelia M Ruland

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jelena MirkovicCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6828-1230
Stian JessenCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8756-3292
Olöf Birna KristjansdottirCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8585-5547
Tonje KrogsethCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3388-663X
Absera Teshome KorichoCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3778-000X
Cornelia M RulandCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Division of Medicine, Oslo University Hostipal, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6521-4884
University of Oslo · NOOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmerging research from psychology and the bio-behavioral sciences recognizes the importance of supporting patients to mobilize their personal strengths to live well with chronic illness. Positive technology and positive computing could be used as underlying design approaches to guide design and development of new technology-based interventions for this user group that support mobilizing their personal strengths.

objectiveA codesigning workshop was organized with the aim to explore user requirements and ideas for how technology can be used to help people with chronic illness activate their personal strengths in managing their everyday challenges.

methodsThirty-five participants from diverse backgrounds (patients, health care providers, designers, software developers, and researchers) participated. The workshop combined principles of (1) participatory and service design to enable meaningful participation and collaboration of different stakeholders and (2) an appreciative inquiry methodology to shift participants' attention to positive traits, values, and aspects that are meaningful and life-giving and stimulate participants' creativity, engagement, and collaboration. Utilizing these principles, participants were engaged in group activities to develop ideas for strengths-supportive tools. Each group consisted of 3-8 participants with different backgrounds. All group work was analysed using thematic analyses.

resultsParticipants were highly engaged in all activities and reported a wide variety of requirements and ideas, including more than 150 personal strength examples, more than 100 everyday challenges that could be addressed by using personal strengths, and a wide range of functionality requirements (eg, social support, strength awareness and reflection, and coping strategies). 6 concepts for strength-supportive tools were created. These included the following: a mobile app to support a person to store, reflect on, and mobilize one's strengths (Strengths treasure chest app); "empathy glasses" enabling a person to see a situation from another person's perspective (Empathy Simulator); and a mobile app allowing a person to receive supportive messages from close people in a safe user-controlled environment (Cheering squad app). Suggested design elements for making the tools engaging included: metaphors (eg, trees, treasure island), visualization techniques (eg, dashboards, color coding), and multimedia (eg, graphics). Maintaining a positive focus throughout the tool was an important requirement, especially for feedback and framing of content.

conclusionsCombining participatory, service design, and appreciative inquiry methods were highly useful to engage participants in creating innovative ideas. Building on peoples' core values and positive experiences empowered the participants to expand their horizons from addressing problems and symptoms, which is a very common approach in health care today, to focusing on their capacities and that which is possible, despite their chronic illness. The ideas and user requirements, combined with insights from relevant theories (eg, positive technology, self-management) and evidence from the related literature, are critical to guide the development of future more personalized and strengths-focused self-management tools.

Indexed as

appreciative inquirychronic diseasecodesigneHealthmHealthparticipatory designpatient participationpatient personal strengthspatient requirementspositive computingpositive technologyservice design

Identifiers

PMID30684404
PMCPMC6334702
OpenAlexW2799917479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.