Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36279167›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2022

Co-design of Digital Health Interventions for Young Adults: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

Jessica A Malloy, Stephanie R Partridge, Joya A Kemper, Andrea Braakhuis, Rajshri Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

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

5 authors.

Jessica A MalloyDiscipline of Nutrition & Dietetics, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5569-1019
Stephanie R PartridgeWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5390-3922
Joya A KemperDepartment of Management, Marketing, and Entrepreneurship, University of Canterbury Business School, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1778-8346
Andrea BraakhuisDiscipline of Nutrition & Dietetics, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6055-0595
Rajshri RoyDiscipline of Nutrition & Dietetics, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7939-1790

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital health interventions, including apps and web-based services, are on the rise due to their facilitated access to target groups. The constant evolution of technology calls for participatory research methodologies to understand youth expectations and the use of technology. The creative and collaborative nature of co-design allows for the active integration of youth desires and may enhance acceptability when it comes to digital health tools.

objectiveThe primary objective of this review is to assess the breadth of literature on digital health interventions that have been co-designed for and by young adults, including the types of available evidence, the identification of key characteristics relevant to young adult co-design, and the examination of research conduct in this space.

methodsThe proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Scoping Reviews. As well as the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist for reporting scoping reviews, an adaptation of Arksey and O'Malley's 6-stage framework for scoping reviews will be referenced. Peer-reviewed primary research, where young adults (aged 15-35 years) were actively involved in the design and development process of digital health interventions, will be collated for analyses. Five databases, including MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane, CINAHL Plus, Google Scholar, and Scopus, will be searched for relevant papers. Search strategies will be comprehensive to identify both published and unpublished literature. Relevant gray literature and secondary research will be excluded but pooled for separate analysis and citation chaining. Results will be presented in one or multiple forms, including narrative, tabular, or diagrammatic.

resultsData collection commenced in October 2021. Following data extraction according to the JBI results extraction instrument and independent quality assurance of included studies, a narrative synthesis of each paper included in the final pool will allow for data charting. As of May 2022, 19 papers are included for analysis. We expect the results to be published by autumn 2022.

conclusionsThis protocol provides guidance for researchers who plan to conduct a similar style of investigation and promotes standardization of the scoping review process. We anticipate the provision of an overview of participatory digital health research involving young adults, highlighting any gaps in this research area, as well as potential areas for further study. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38635.

Indexed as

adolescentco-designdigital health interventiondigital interventioneHealthhealth librarianinformation sciencelibrary sciencemedical librarianmHealthparticipatory designparticipatory medicineparticipatory researchprotocolreviewsearch strategysocial mediateenageruser feedbackuser participationweb-based toolyoung adultyouth

Identifiers

PMID36279167
PMCPMC9641514

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.