ReviewPLOS digital health2024
How to design equitable digital health tools: A narrative review of design tactics, case studies, and opportunities.
Review in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Structural biases in digital health intervention and health equity research: a bibliometric knowledge graph analysis (2015-2025).Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- Perceptions of Technology and Digital Health Tools Among Recently Incarcerated Adults With Opioid Use Disorder: Semistructured Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Association Between Behavioral Phenotypes and Paid Subscription and Renewal Among New mHealth App Users: Six-Month Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Trust-Centered Design and Feasibility Evaluation of an AI-Enabled Conversational Health Tool for Sexual and Reproductive Health Among Rural Young Adults: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Participatory Design Process of a Supportive Digital Platform to Enhance Local Urban Food Systems.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Centering Equity During Health Technology Innovation: Scoping Review of Methods and Research Adjustments to Promote Inclusive Coproduction.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Cocreating Principles for Digital Health Equity: Cross-Sectional, Qualitative Study for Participatory Human-Centered Design in Catalonia.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Views on a Chatbot for Cancer Family History Collection among Leaders of Hispanic and Pacific Islander Communities in Utah.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Effective strategies for job retention in hospitals: insights from the EU METEOR project's online toolbox.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Endurance Sports: Metabolic, Recovery, and Nutritional Perspectives.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Big data approaches for novel mechanistic insights on sleep and circadian rhythms: a workshop summary.Sleep · 2025Article
- A Just-in-Time Adaptive Intervention (Shift) to Manage Problem Anger After Trauma: Co-Design and Development Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Co-Designing, Developing, and Testing a Mental Health Platform for Young People Using a Participatory Design Methodology in Colombia: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Observational
- Increasing the inclusivity of digital health co-production: an integrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Supporting teams with designing for dissemination and sustainability: the design, development, and usability of a digital interactive platform.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With a renewed focus on health equity in the United States driven by national crises and legislation to improve digital healthcare innovation, there is a need for the designers of digital health tools to take deliberate steps to design for equity in their work. A concrete toolkit of methods to design for health equity is needed to support digital health practitioners in this aim. This narrative review summarizes several health equity frameworks to help digital health practitioners conceptualize the equity dimensions of importance for their work, and then provides design approaches that accommodate an equity focus. Specifically, the Double Diamond Model, the IDEAS framework and toolkit, and community collaboration techniques such as participatory design are explored as mechanisms for practitioners to solicit input from members of underserved groups and better design digital health tools that serve their needs. Each of these design methods requires a deliberate effort by practitioners to infuse health equity into the approach. A series of case studies that use different methods to build in equity considerations are offered to provide examples of how this can be accomplished and demonstrate the range of applications available depending on resources, budget, product maturity, and other factors. We conclude with a call for shared rigor around designing digital health tools that deliver equitable outcomes for members of underserved populations.
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.