ArticleJMIR formative research2023
Improving the Engagement of Underrepresented People in Health Research Through Equity-Centered Design Thinking: Qualitative Study and Process Evaluation for the Development of the Grounding Health Research in Design Toolkit.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular Health and Financial Hardship: Protocol for a Qualitative Citizen Science Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Strategic Treatment and Assessment for Youth (STAY): Development of a culturally humble measurement-based care training.School Psychology International · 2025Article
- School-Partnered Collaborative Care (SPACE) for Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: Development and Usability Study of a Virtual Intervention With Multisystem Community Partners.JMIR diabetes · 2025Article
- Applications of equity frameworks in theory-based health behavior interventions: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Smartphone barrier: uncovering the digital divide in mHealth prevention among disadvantaged middle-aged and older-aged UK communities.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- Supporting teams with designing for dissemination and sustainability: the design, development, and usability of a digital interactive platform.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- How to design equitable digital health tools: A narrative review of design tactics, case studies, and opportunities.PLOS digital health · 2024Review
- Equity Concerns Across Pediatric Research Recruitment: An Analysis of Research Staff Interviews.Academic pediatrics · 2024Article
- Integrating the Polysocial Risk Score: Enhancing Comprehensive Healthcare Delivery.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2024Review
- Gender-aware Parkinson's care: a design-based study of patient perspectives on gender norms and gender-sensitive care.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth inequalities are rooted in historically unjust differences in economic opportunities, environment, access to health care services, and other social determinants. Owing to these health inequalities, the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected underserved populations, notably people of color, incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals, and those unable to physically distance themselves from others. However, people most strongly impacted by health disparities, and the pandemic, are not frequently engaged in research, either as researchers or as participants, resulting in slow progress toward improving health equity. Establishing ways to foster the engagement of historically excluded people is crucial to improving health equity through patient-centered health research.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the use of equity-centered design thinking (EDT) for engaging community members in research prioritization related to COVID-19. The co-design methods and subsequent production of a toolkit that can be used for engagement were assessed through process evaluation and qualitative methods.
methodsProcess evaluation and qualitative inquiry, using reflexive thematic analysis, were undertaken to examine the use of EDT. Patient community members and stakeholders remotely partnered with design and health researchers in a year-long digital process to cocreate capacity-building tools for setting agenda for research regarding the impact of COVID-19 on health outcomes. Through a series of 3 workshops, 5 community partners engaged in EDT activities to identify critical challenges for the health and well-being of their communities. The subsequent tools were tested with 10 health researchers who provided critical input over the course of 2 workshops. Interviews with co-designers, project materials, and feedback sessions were used in the process evaluation and finalization of an equity-centered toolkit for community engagement in research. Data from the co-design process, meetings, workshops, and interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify salient themes.
resultsProcess evaluation illustrated how the EDT co-design process offered an approach to engage patient partners and community stakeholders in health-related research around COVID-19. The participants expressed satisfaction with design thinking approaches, including creative activities and iterative co-design, as a means of working together. Thematic analysis identified 3 key themes: the value of authentic partnerships, building trust and empathy through design, and fostering candid dialogue around health and social issues impacting historically underrepresented and underinvested communities.
conclusionsThe project addressed the need to test EDT strategies for fostering inclusive community engagement in health research agenda setting and provided an alternative to traditional top-down models. Despite the increasing use of human-centered design in health, few projects explicitly include equity in design thinking approaches. The use of methods and tools to intentionally engage underrepresented stakeholders in the process of research agenda setting and equitably sharing power between researchers and community members may improve health research, ultimately improving health equity.
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.