ArticleJMIR aging2019
Requirements for an Electronic Health Tool to Support the Process of Help Seeking by Caregivers of Functionally Impaired Older Adults: Co-Design Approach.
Article in JMIR aging, 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.
- Optimizing Participant Engagement in Cyberhealth Co-Design: Course-of-Action Framework Analysis.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Older Persons' and Health Care Professionals' Design Choices When Co-Designing a Medication Plan Aiming to Promote Patient Safety: Case Study.JMIR aging · 2023Article
- Developing A Mobile App With a Human-Centered Design Lens to Improve Access to Mental Health Care (Mentallys Project): Protocol for an Initial Co-Design Process.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Emerging Technology for Healthy Lifestyle of the Middle-Age and Elderly: A Scoping Review.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Article
- Co-Design of a Financial and Legal Planning Tool for Care Partners of People Living With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.Innovation in aging · 2023Article
- User Experience of the Co-design Research Approach in eHealth: Activity Analysis With the Course-of-Action Framework.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Usability of a Co-designed eHealth Prototype for Caregivers: Combination Study of Three Frameworks.JMIR human factors · 2021Article
- Adoption Intention and Factors Influencing the Use of Gerontechnology in Chinese Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Mixed-Methods Study.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Opportunities and Challenges of a Self-Management App to Support People With Spinal Cord Injury in the Prevention of Pressure Injuries: Qualitative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Promoting Identification and Use of Aid Resources by Caregivers of Seniors: Co-Design of an Electronic Health Tool.JMIR aging · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Quebec, Canada, many public, community, and private organizations provide resources to caregivers of functionally impaired older adults. Nevertheless, these resources may be difficult for caregivers to find. A co-design study was conducted to address the gap between caregivers and access to resources. The purpose of this study was to support the process of help seeking by caregivers of functionally impaired older adults through electronic health (eHealth).
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to focus on the identification of functional and content requirements for an eHealth tool to support the help-seeking process of caregivers of functionally impaired older adults.
methodsThis study uses a co-design process based on qualitative action research approach to develop an eHealth tool with health and social service professionals (HSSPs), community workers, and caregivers. The participants acted as co-designers in identifying requirements for the tool. A total of 4 design workshops and 1 advisory committee session were held in different locations in Quebec, Canada. Activities were videotaped and analyzed with a conceptual framework of user experience.
resultsA total of 11 caregivers, 16 community workers, and 11 HSSPs participated in identifying the requirements for the eHealth tool. Several functional and content requirements were identified for each user need (19). Content requirements differed depending on the category of participant, corresponding to the concept of user segmentation in the design of information and communication technology. Nevertheless, there were disagreements among co-designers about specific functionalities, which included (1) functionalities related to the social Web, (2) functionalities related to the evaluation of resources for caregivers, and (3) functionalities related to the emerging technologies. Several co-design sessions were required to resolve disagreements.
conclusionsCo-designers (participants) were able to identify functional and content requirements for each of the previously identified needs; however, several discussions were required to achieve consensus. Decision making was influenced by identity, social context, and participants' knowledge, and it is a challenge to reconcile the different perspectives. The findings stressed the importance of allowing more time to deal with the iterative aspect of the design activity, especially during the identification of requirements of an eHealth tool. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/11634.
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.