ArticleJMIR formative research2023
Applying User-Centered Design and Implementation Science to the Early-Stage Development of a Telehealth-Enhanced Hybrid Cardiac Rehabilitation Program: Quality Improvement Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The integration of quality improvement and implementation science methods and frameworks in healthcare: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Integrating digital health and remote monitoring: emerging trends in cardiac rehabilitation research for chronic heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Rationale and design of the IMProving Adherence to medications for breast Cancer and cardiovascular disease equiTably (IMPACT) randomized clinical trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2025Article
- Article
- Barriers and limitations to the development of a telemental health service for workers in Peru- A user-centered approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- Leveraging Implementation Science at the Early-Stage Development of a Novel Telehealth-Delivered Fear of Exercise Program to Understand Intervention Feasibility and Implementation Potential: Feasibility Behavioral Intervention Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Co-designing a cardiac rehabilitation program with knowledge users for patients with cardiovascular disease from a remote area.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Factors Facilitating and Inhibiting the Implementation of Telerehabilitation-A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Usability and optimization of online apps in user's context.PeerJ. Computer science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention that improves event-free survival in patients with cardiac conditions, yet <27% of all eligible patients use CR in the United States. CR is traditionally delivered in clinic-based settings where implementation barriers abound. Innovative nontraditional program designs and strategies are needed to support widespread CR uptake.
objectiveThis study aimed to demonstrate how user-centered design (UCD) and implementation science (IS) principles and methods can be integrated into the early-stage development of nontraditional CR interventions.
methodsAs part of a NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital (NYPH) quality improvement initiative (March 2020-February 2022), we combined UCD and IS principles and methods to design a novel home- and clinic-based telehealth-enhanced hybrid CR (THCR) program. We co-designed this program with multilevel stakeholders using an iterative 3-step UCD process to identify user and contextual barriers and facilitators to CR uptake (using semistructured interviews and contextual inquiry [step 1]), design an intervention prototype that targets contextual and user factors and emulates the evidence-based practice (through design workshops and journey mapping [step 2]), and review and refine the prototype (according to real-world usability testing and feedback [step 3]). The UCD process was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
resultsAt step 1, we conducted semistructured interviews with 9 provider- and system-level stakeholders (female: n=6, 67%) at 3 geographically diverse academic medical centers, which revealed behavioral (eg, self-efficacy and knowledge) and contextual (eg, social distancing guidelines, physical space, staffing, and reimbursement) barriers to uptake; hybrid delivery was a key facilitator. Step 2 involved conducting 20 design workshops and 3 journey-mapping sessions with multidisciplinary NYPH stakeholders (eg, digital health team, CR clinicians, and creative director) where we identified key design elements (eg, mix of clinic- and home-based CR and synchronous remote patient monitoring), yielding an initial THCR prototype that leveraged NYPH's telehealth infrastructure. At step 3, we conducted usability testing with 2 CR clinicians (both female) administering home-based sessions to 3 CR patients (female: n=1, 33%), which revealed usability themes (eg, ease of using remote patient monitoring devices or a telehealth platform, technology disruptions, and confidence in using the telehealth platform to safely monitor patients) and design solutions (eg, onboarding sessions, safety surveys, and fully supervised remote sessions) to be included in the final THCR prototype.
conclusionsCombining UCD and IS methods while engaging multidisciplinary stakeholders in an iterative process yielded a theory-informed THCR program targeting user and contextual barriers to real-world CR implementation. We provide a detailed summary of the process and guidance for incorporating UCD and IS principles and methods into the early-stage development of a nontraditional CR intervention. The feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and usability of the final THCR prototype is being evaluated in an ongoing study.
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.