ArticlePLOS digital health2023
Maximizing the value of patient and public involvement in the digital health co-design process: A qualitative descriptive study with design leaders and patient-public partners.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying Social Media-Based Interactions That Help Adults to Adhere to Weight Loss Goals: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026Pooled it
- Codesign and system integration as interacting demands in digital health for youth experiencing chronic pain.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Impact of Patient Portals on Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-Related Quality-of-Care Outcomes: Systematic Review.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Review
- 'You've Given Me My Voice'-Enhancing Engagement in Exercise Oncology Research: A Patient and Public Involvement Approach to Co‑Designing a Pre‑Radiotherapy Exercise Programme With People Living With Lung Cancer.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Laying the Foundations for Co-Design: A Micro-Community Engagement Approach to Patient and Public Involvement in Rural Health Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Gamified Assessment of Cognitive Impulsivity in Eating Disorders and Mental Ill-Health: Mixed Methods Study Incorporating Lived Experience Co-Design and Evaluation.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- Patient and Designer Collaboration in Cocreating Technical Innovations in a Hospital-Based Makerspace: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Development of Virtual Mental Health Stepped Care Service for a Heart Failure Remote Management Program: Qualitative Descriptive Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Exploring Factors Associated With the Stalled Implementation of a Ground-Up Electronic Health Record System in South Africa: Qualitative Insights From the E-Tick Case Study Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Implementation strategies to promote e-Tracker use in the childhood immunization program in Rwanda - a mixed methods study.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- A qualitative study to refine and finalize the MedManageSCI prototype: A web-based toolkit to support medication self-management in adults with spinal cord injury/dysfunction.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Leveraging lived experience in rural settings: a systematic review protocol of digital healthcare environment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Exploring the Impact of a Remote Monitoring System for Palliative and End-of-Life Care (CARE-PAC): Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Key Components of Participatory Design Workshops for Digital Health Solutions: Nominal Group Technique and Feasibility Study.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2025Article
- Evidence-based digital health interventions for breast cancer survivors' care: an umbrella review.Internet interventions · 2025Review
- Co-design and prototype development of MedManageSCI: a medication self-management toolkit for adults with spinal cord injury/dysfunction.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Digital Transformation in Patient Organizations: Interview and Focus Group Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in the co-design and assessment of unobtrusive sensing technologies for care at home: a user-centric design approach.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Between willingness and practice: a nationwide survey of 1,334 German patient organization members on user involvement in digital service development.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- AI-driven tools for the prediction of obesity-related vascular diseases: stakeholder perspectives and challenges.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health interventions have enormous potential to support patients and the public in achieving their health goals. Nonetheless, many digital health interventions are failing to effectively engage patients and the public. One solution that has been proposed is to directly involve patients and the public in the design process of these digital health interventions. Although there is consensus that involving patients and the public in collaborative design is valuable, design teams have little guidance on how to maximize the value of their collaborative design work. The main objective of this study was to understand how the value of patient and public involvement in digital health design can be maximized, from the perspective of design leaders and patient-public partners. Using a qualitative descriptive methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 design leaders and 9 patient-public partners. Interviewees agreed that involving patients and the public was valuable, however, they questioned if current collaborative methods were optimized to ensure maximal value. Interviewees suggested that patient and public collaborative design can add value through four different mechanisms: (1) by allowing the design process to be an empowering intervention itself, (2) by ensuring that the digital health intervention will be effectively engaging for users, (3) by ensuring that the digital health intervention will be seamlessly implemented in practice, and (4) by allowing patient-public collaborations extend beyond the initial product design. Overall, interviewees emphasized that although collaborative design has historically focused on improving the digital health product itself, patients and the public have crucial insights on implementation planning as well as how collaborative design can be used as its own empowering intervention. The results of this paper provide clarity about the ways that patient and public collaborative design can be made more valuable. Digital health design teams can use these results to be more intentional about their collaborative design approaches.
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.