Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35986365›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2022

Deconstructing design thinking as a tool for the implementation of a population health initiative.

Caitlin Jarrett, Yara C Baxter, Johannes Boch, Conrado Carrasco, Daniel Cobos Muñoz, Karina Mauro Dib, Lara Pessoa, Jasmina Saric, Mariana Silveira, Peter Steinmann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Uncovering the Dynamic System Driving Older Adults' Vitality: A Causal Loop Diagram Co-Created With Dutch Older Adults.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A design thinking-led approach to develop a responsive feeding intervention for Australian families vulnerable to food insecurity: Eat, Learn, Grow.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Caitlin JarrettSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Yara C BaxterNovartis Foundation, Basel, Switzerland.
Johannes BochNovartis Foundation, Basel, Switzerland.
Conrado CarrascoUniversidade Federal do ABC, São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil.
Daniel Cobos MuñozSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Karina Mauro DibSecretaria Municipal da Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil.
Lara PessoaUniversidade Estadual do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jasmina SaricSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Mariana SilveiraInstituto Tellus, São Paulo, Brazil.
Peter SteinmannSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland. peter.steinmann@swisstph.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4800-3019
Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHNovartis Foundation · CHSecretaria Municipal de Saúde · BRUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversidade Federal do ABC · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe translation of evidence-based practices and rapid uptake of innovations into global health practice is challenging. Design thinking is a consultative process involving multiple stakeholders and has been identified as a promising solution to create and apply implementation strategies in complex environments like health systems.

methodsWe conducted a process evaluation of a real-world example, namely an initiative to innovate hypertension screening, diagnosis and care in São Paulo, Brazil. The parameters of the evaluation were informed by a specification rubric and categorization system, recommended for the investigation of implementation strategies, and the double-diamond conceptual framework to describe and examine the strategic architecture and nature of the design thinking approach, with particular emphasis on identifying potential areas of "value-add" particular to the approach. The retrospective evaluation was performed by an independent partner who had not been involved in the setting up and implementation of the design thinking process.

resultsThe evaluation unveiled a dense catalogue of strategically driven, mostly theoretically based, activities involving all identified health system stakeholders including patients. Narrative reconstruction illuminated the systematic and coherent nature of this approach, with different resulting actions progressively accounting for all relevant layers of the health system to engineer a broad selection of specific implementation solutions. The relevance of the identified features and the mechanics used to promote more successful implementation practices was manifested in several distinct ways: design thinking offered a clear direction on which innovations really mattered and when, as well as several new dimensions for consideration in the development of an innovation mindset amongst stakeholders. It thereby promoted relationship quality in terms of familiarity and trust, and commitment to evidence-based enquiry and action. Design thinking was also able to navigate the territory between the need for intervention "fidelity" versus "adaptation" and provide the operational know-how to face familiar implementation hurdles. Lastly, it brought a new kind of skill set to the public health stakeholders that incorporated diplomacy, multidisciplinary approaches and management sciences-skills that are considered necessary but not yet widely taught as part of public health training.

conclusionsDesign thinking is a sound and viable tool to use as part of an implementation strategy for engaging with health system stakeholders and successfully translating evidence-based practices and new innovations into routine practice, thereby addressing an important knowledge-practice gap and, more broadly, contributing to the strategic repertoire available to implementation science.

Indexed as

Implementation SciencePopulation HealthBrazilHumansPublic HealthRetrospective StudiesCardiovascular diseaseDesign thinkingGlobal health initiativesHealth systemsHypertensionImplementation scienceInnovationProcess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID35986365
PMCPMC9389775
OpenAlexW4292297611

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.