Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38453248›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2024

Designathons in health research: a global systematic review.

Warittha Tieosapjaroen, Elizabeth Chen, Tiarney Ritchwood, Chunyan Li, Jamie L Conklin, Abdulhammed Opeyemi Babatunde, Arturo M Ongkeko, Ucheoma Nwaozuru, Joseph D Tucker, Nina T Castillo Carandang and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Warittha TieosapjaroenMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9712-9262
Elizabeth ChenDepartment of Health Behavior, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Tiarney RitchwoodDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Chunyan LiTokyo College, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Jamie L ConklinHealth Sciences Library, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Abdulhammed Opeyemi BabatundeMedicine and Surgery, Faculty of Clinical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3648-5340
Arturo M OngkekoNational Institutes of Health, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, The Philippines.
Ucheoma NwaozuruDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.
Joseph D TuckerInstitute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2804-1181
Nina T Castillo CarandangFoundation for the Advancement of Clinical Epidemiology Inc, Manila, The Philippines.
Jason J OngMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Carlton, Victoria, Australia jason.ong@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5784-7403
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of the Philippines Manila · PHDuke University · USLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMelbourne Sexual Health Centre · AUThe University of Tokyo · JPUniversity of Ibadan · NGWake Forest University · US

Funding

Sustaining Innovative Tools to Expand Youth-Friendly HIV Self-Testing (S-ITEST)UG1HD113156 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI OLIVER CHUKWUJEKWU EZECHI, Juliet Iwelunmor · 2023 to 2026
$4.8M
Pay-it-forward gonorrhea testing among men who have sex with men: The PIONEER pragmatic randomized controlled trialR01AI158826 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI TANG, WEIMING, TUCKER, JOSEPH DAVID · 2021 to 2025
$3.1M
Actions for Collaborative Community Engaged Strategies for HPV (ACCESS-HPV)R01CA271033 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI OLIVER CHUKWUJEKWU EZECHI, Juliet Iwelunmor · 2022 to 2026
$2.5M
Mentoring Multidisciplinary Global HIV Patient-Oriented ResearchK24AI143471 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Joseph David Tucker · 2019 to 2026
$1.4M
Social support to retain adolescents living with HIV in care and improve ART adherenceK08MH118965 · NIMH · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RITCHWOOD, TIARNEY D · 2019 to 2023
$908k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA271033NIAID NIH HHS K24 AI143471NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI158826NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD113156NIMH NIH HHS K08 MH118965
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA designathon is a three-stage participatory activity informed by design thinking. There is a growing literature on designathons in health. This study synthesised designathons' effectiveness and implementation-related factors to address health challenges.

methodsWe searched Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry for articles containing primary data on designathons for health from their dates of inception to 29 November 2022. We retrieved additional studies from citation searching and a complementary open call. We synthesised data on designathons' effectiveness (ie, engagement, outputs and implementation), required resources and implementation-related factors (ie, resources, facilitators, barriers, strengths and limitations). We assessed the risk of bias using a checklist adapted from Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools.

resultsIn total, 4973 citations were identified, and 42 studies were included. In total, 26 studies (62%) were from high-income countries. The median number of total participants was 49, divided into a median of 8 teams. The duration of the intensive collaboration phase ranged from 3 hours to 7 days. Common evaluation criteria were feasibility, innovation and impact. Idea and prototype outputs included mobile phone applications, educational programmes and medical devices. Interventions developed from a designathon was estimated to be highly cost-effective. The most common facilitators were interdisciplinary participants and high-quality mentorship. The most common barriers were suboptimal execution of the events, difficulties in balancing interdisciplinary participants across teams and limited support for participants along the process. There were limited data on required resources and further implementation of solutions after designathons.

conclusionGiven designathons' adaptability in terms of budget, mode of delivery, type of output and involvement of diverse participants, including end users, designathons can be implemented in a wide range of contexts to address various health issues. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023389685.

Indexed as

Health policies and all other topicsPublic HealthSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38453248
PMCPMC10921519
OpenAlexW4392560678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.