ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Development of a Digital Health Intervention for the Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease (INTERCEPT): Co-Design and Usability Testing Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital Episodic Future Thinking Intervention (Luminaut): Co-Design and Iterative Development Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSecondary prevention is an important strategy to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD), a leading cause of death worldwide. Despite the growing evidence for the effectiveness of digital health interventions (DHIs) for the secondary prevention of CVD, the majority are designed with minimal input from target end users, resulting in poor uptake and usage.
objectiveThis study aimed to optimize the acceptance and effectiveness of a DHI for the secondary prevention of CVD through co-design, integrating end users' perspectives throughout.
methodsA theory-driven, person-based approach using co-design was adopted for the development of the DHI, known as INTERCEPT. This involved a 4-phase iterative process using online workshops. In phase 1, a stakeholder team of health care professionals, software developers, and public and patient involvement members was established. Phase 2 involved identification of the guiding principles, content, and design features of the DHI. In phase 3, DHI prototypes were reviewed for clarity of language, ease of navigation, and functionality. To anticipate and interpret DHI usage, phase 4 involved usability testing with participants who had a recent cardiac event (<2 years). To assess the potential impact of usability testing, the System Usability Scale was administered before and after testing. The GUIDED (Guidance for Reporting Intervention Development Studies in Health Research) checklist was used to report the development process.
resultsFive key design principles were identified: simplicity and ease of use, behavioral change through goal setting and self-monitoring, personalization, system credibility, and social support. Usability testing resulted in 64 recommendations for the app, of which 51 were implemented. Improvements in System Usability Scale scores were observed when comparing the results before and after implementing the recommendations (61 vs 83; P=.02).
conclusionsCombining behavior change theory with a person-based, co-design approach facilitated the development of a DHI for the secondary prevention of CVD that optimized responsiveness to end users' needs and preferences, thereby potentially improving future engagement.
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.