Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34283030›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

A Clinician-Led, Experience-Based Co-Design Approach for Developing mHealth Services to Support the Patient Self-management of Chronic Conditions: Development Study and Design Case.

Ting Song, Ping Yu, Vida Bliokas, Yasmine Probst, Gregory E Peoples, Siyu Qian, Lauren Houston, Pascal Perez, Mehrdad Amirghasemi, Tingru Cui and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors.

Ting SongCentre for Digital Transformation, School of Computing and Information Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5858-6495
Ping Yu *Centre for Digital Transformation, School of Computing and Information Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7910-9396
Vida BliokasIllawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3573-6443
Yasmine ProbstIllawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1971-173X
Gregory E PeoplesSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8279-1787
Siyu QianCentre for Digital Transformation, School of Computing and Information Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1332-4800
Lauren HoustonIllawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0825-0373
Pascal PerezIllawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6151-6228
Mehrdad AmirghasemiSmart Infrastructure Facility, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8466-1380
Tingru CuiSchool of Computing and Information Systems, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7899-1372
Nadeesha Pathiraja Rathnayaka HitigeCentre for Digital Transformation, School of Computing and Information Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2749-4816
Natalie Anne Smith *Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8337-4352

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the increasing use of mobile health (mHealth) services, such as mHealth apps or SMS text messaging services, that support the patient self-management of chronic conditions, many existing mHealth services lack theoretical guidance. In addition, although often the target audience for requirement acquisition at the initial mHealth app design stage, it is a common challenge for them to fully conceptualize their needs for mHealth services that help self-manage chronic conditions.

objectiveThis study proposes a novel co-design approach with the initial requirements for mHealth services proposed by clinicians based on their experiences in guiding patients to self-manage chronic conditions. A design case is presented to illustrate our innovative approach to designing an mHealth app that supports the self-management of patients with obesity in their preparation for elective surgery.

methodsWe adopted a clinician-led co-design approach. The co-design approach consisted of the following four cyclic phases: understanding user needs, identifying an applicable underlying theory, integrating the theory into the prototype design, and evaluating and refining the prototype mHealth services with patients. Expert panel discussions, a literature review, intervention mapping, and patient focus group discussions were conducted in these four phases.

resultsIn stage 1, the expert panel proposed the following three common user needs: motivational, educational, and supportive needs. In stage 2, the team selected the Social Cognitive Theory to guide the app design. In stage 3, the team designed and developed the key functions of the mHealth app, including automatic push notifications; web-based resources; goal setting and monitoring; and interactive health-related exchanges that encourage physical activity, healthy eating, psychological preparation, and a positive outlook for elective surgery. Push notifications were designed in response to a patient's risk level, as informed by the person's response to a baseline health survey. In stage 4, the prototype mHealth app was used to capture further requirements from patients in the two focus group discussions. Focus group participants affirmed the potential benefits of the app and suggested more requirements for the function, presentation, and personalization needs. The app was improved based on these suggestions.

conclusionsThis study reports an innovative co-design approach that was used to leverage the clinical experiences of clinicians to produce the initial prototype app and the approach taken to allow patients to effectively voice their needs and expectations for the mHealth app in a focus group discussion. This approach can be generalized to the design of any mHealth service that aims to support the patient self-management of chronic conditions.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsSelf-ManagementTelemedicineText MessagingExerciseHumanschronic diseasecommunity-based participatory researchmHealthmobile appsmobile phoneobesitysmartphonesurgerytheory

Identifiers

PMID34283030
PMCPMC8335618

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.