Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35943783›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2022

User Experience of the Co-design Research Approach in eHealth: Activity Analysis With the Course-of-Action Framework.

Melanie Tremblay, Christine Hamel, Anabelle Viau-Guay, Dominique Giroux

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Melanie TremblayDepartment of Teaching and Learning Studies, Laval University, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-5902
Christine HamelDepartment of Teaching and Learning Studies, Laval University, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3243-1043
Anabelle Viau-GuayDepartment of Teaching and Learning Studies, Laval University, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6725-090X
Dominique GirouxVITAM Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Laval University, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3264-5319
Centres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services Sociaux · CAUniversité Laval · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe cocreation of eHealth solutions with potential users, or co-design, can help make the solution more acceptable. However, the co-design research approach requires substantial investment, and projects are not always fruitful. Researchers have provided guidelines for the co-design approach, but these are either applicable only in specific situations or not supported by empirical data. Ways to optimize the experience of the co-design process from the point of view of the participants are also missing. Scientific literature in the co-design field generally provides an extrinsic description of the experience of participants in co-design projects.

objectiveWe addressed this issue by describing a co-design project and focusing on the participants' experiences looking at what was significant from their point of view.

methodsWe used a qualitative situated cognitive anthropology approach for this study. Data were collected on a co-design research project that aimed to support the help-seeking process of caregivers of functionally dependent older adults. The methodology was based on the perspective of experience by Dewey and used the course-of-action theoretical and methodological framework. Data collection was conducted in 2 phases: observation of participants and recording of sessions and participant self-confrontation interviews using the session recordings. We interviewed 27% (20/74) of the participants. We analyzed the data through nonexclusive emerging categorization of themes using the constant comparative method.

resultsIn total, 5 emerging themes were identified. The perception of extrinsic constraints and the effects of the situation was central and the most important theme, affecting other themes (frustrating interactions with others, learning together, destabilization, and getting personal benefits). Co-occurrences between codes allowed for a visual and narrative understanding of what was significant for the participants during this project. The results highlighted the importance of the role of the research team in preparing and moderating the sessions. They also provided a detailed description of the interactions between participants during the sessions, which is a core aspect of the co-design approach. There were positive and negative aspects of the participants' experiences during this co-design project. Reflecting on our results, we provided potential affordances to shape the experience of participants in co-design.

conclusionsPotential users are an essential component of the co-design research approach. Researchers and designers should seek to offer these users a positive and contributory experience to encourage participation in further co-design initiatives. Future research should explore how the proposed affordances influence the success of the intervention.

Indexed as

activity analysisaffordancescaregiversco-designcourse-of-action frameworkguidelinesintrinsic descriptionparticipant experience

Identifiers

PMID35943783
PMCPMC9399883
OpenAlexW4292455902

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.