ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Addressing technology-mediated stigma in sexual health-related digital platforms: Insights from design team members.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Addressing online-facilitated stigma: a co-design workshop among patients with lived experiences of dyspareunia.BMJ open · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health technologies are increasingly used as complementary tools in accessing sexual health-related services. At the same time, there are concerns regarding how some interface features and content of these technologies could inadvertently foment stigma among end users. In this study, we explored how design teams (i.e., those involved in creating digital health technologies) might address stigmatizing components when designing sexual health-related digital technologies. We interviewed 14 design team members (i.e., software engineers, user interface and user experience (UI/UX) designers, content creators, and project managers) who were involved in digital health design projects across two universities in western Canada. The interviews sought to undersand their perspectives of how to create destigmatizing digital technologies and were centered on strategies that they might adopt or the kind of expertise or support they might need to be able to address stigmatizing features or content on sexual health-related digital technologies. The findings revealed two overarching approaches regarding how digital health technologies could be designed to prevent the unintended effects of stigma. These include functional design considerations (i.e., pop-up notifications, infographics, and video-based testimonials, and avoiding the use of cookies or other security-risk features) and non-functional design considerations (i.e., adopting an interprofessional and collaborative approach to design, educating software designers on domain knowledge about stigma, and ensuring consistent user testing of content). These findings reflected functional and non-functional design strategies as applied in software design. These findings are considered crucial in addressing stigma but are not often apparent to designers involved in digital health projects. This suggests the need for software engineers to understand and consider non-functional, emotional, and content-related design strategies that could address stigmatizing attributes via digital health platforms.
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.