ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
An Evaluation Service for Digital Public Health Interventions: User-Centered Design Approach.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Quality of Evidence Regarding Permanently Listed Digital Health Applications (DiGAs) in Germany: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Small Data Approaches to Link Faster Time Scale Engagement Dynamics with Slower Time Scale Outcomes in Biobehavioral Interventions.Chinese political science review · 2025Article
- Development of Personas and Journey Maps for Artificial Intelligence Agents Supporting the Use of Health Big Data: Human-Centered Design Approach.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- More than a chatbot: a practical framework to harness artificial intelligence across key components to boost digital therapeutics quality.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- A Framework for the Human-Centered Design of Service Processes Enabled by Medical Devices: A Case Study of Wearable Devices for Parkinson's Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Exploring the Impact of a Sleep App on Sleep Quality in a General Population Sample: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Methods, Indicators, and End-User Involvement in the Evaluation of Digital Health Interventions for the Public: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- A patient-centered interactive voice response system for supporting self-management in kidney transplantation: design and field testing.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- The Use of Evaluation Panels During the Development of a Digital Intervention for Veterans Based on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: Qualitative Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Digital intervention for public health: searching for implementing characteristics, concepts and recommendations: scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- A Digital Health Service for Elderly People with Balance Disorders and Risk of Falling: A Design Science Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Benefit Assessment and Reimbursement of Digital Health Applications: Concepts for Setting Up a New System for Public Coverage.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Development of the key performance indicators for digital health interventions: A scoping review.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital health interventions (DHIs) have the potential to improve public health by combining effective interventions and population reach. However, what biomedical researchers and digital developers consider an effective intervention differs, thereby creating an ongoing challenge to integrating their respective approaches when evaluating DHIs.
objectiveThis study aims to report on the Public Health England (PHE) initiative set out to operationalize an evaluation framework that combines biomedical and digital approaches and demonstrates the impact, cost-effectiveness, and benefit of DHIs on public health.
methodsWe comprised a multidisciplinary project team including service designers, academics, and public health professionals and used user-centered design methods, such as qualitative research, engagement with end users and stakeholders, and iterative learning. The iterative approach enabled the team to sequentially define the problem, understand user needs, identify opportunity areas, develop concepts, test prototypes, and plan service implementation. Stakeholders, senior leaders from PHE, and a working group critiqued the outputs.
resultsWe identified 26 themes and 82 user needs from semistructured interviews (N=15), expressed as 46 Jobs To Be Done, which were then validated across the journey of evaluation design for a DHI. We identified seven essential concepts for evaluating DHIs: evaluation thinking, evaluation canvas, contract assistant, testing toolkit, development history, data hub, and publish health outcomes. Of these, three concepts were prioritized for further testing and development, and subsequently refined into the proposed PHE Evaluation Service for public health DHIs. Testing with PHE's Couch-to-5K app digital team confirmed the viability, desirability, and feasibility of both the evaluation approach and the Evaluation Service.
conclusionsAn iterative, user-centered design approach enabled PHE to combine the strengths of academic and biomedical disciplines with the expertise of nonacademic and digital developers for evaluating DHIs. Design-led methodologies can add value to public health settings. The subsequent service, now known as Evaluating Digital Health Products, is currently in use by health bodies in the United Kingdom and is available to others for tackling the problem of evaluating DHIs pragmatically and responsively.
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.