Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40726748›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare informatics research2025

Key Components of Participatory Design Workshops for Digital Health Solutions: Nominal Group Technique and Feasibility Study.

Kerstin Denecke, Octavio Rivera-Romero, Guido Giunti, Karin Van Holten, Elia Gabarron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare informatics research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Kerstin DeneckeDepartment of Engineering and Computer Science, Institute Patient-Centered Digital Health, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Quellgasse 21, Biel, 2502 Switzerland.
Octavio Rivera-RomeroElectronic Technology Department, Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain.
Guido GiuntiSchool of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Karin Van HoltenSchool of Health Professions, Competence Centre Participatory Health Care, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.
Elia GabarronDepartment of Education, ICT and Learning, Østfold University College, Halden, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Participatory design (PD) is an essential method in the development of digital health solutions since it promises to increase acceptance, usability, and trust in the developed solution. Although careful planning and preparation is crucial for the success of PD workshops, a framework of key components to consider is still missing. The objective of this work is to develop such framework enriched with examples for aspects to be considered when planning and conducting PD workshops for designing and developing digital interventions in healthcare. We applied the nominal group technique with four participants with backgrounds in computer science, health informatics, psychology, and social anthropology to identify key components of PD workshops. The resulting framework was applied by an expert in PD to a case of a digital health solution for fatigue self-management for multiple sclerosis. The feasibility and applicability of the framework and its shortcomings were assessed. As a result, a framework consisting of five main categories and a total of 36 factors were assigned and defined in relation to the categories. The categories are participatory process, involved persons and their roles, workshop definition, setting, privacy and ethics, including regulations. The application of the framework to the test case demonstrated the feasibility and applicability of the suggested framework as well as the shortcomings of the analyzed PD process. This framework provides practical guidance while highlighting the complexity of PD workshops, encouraging their broad adoption, critical reflection, and continuous refinement. It has potential to improve the conduct of PD workshops and, in this way, potential to improve usability, acceptance, and usefulness of digital health solutions. In future work, the user perspective could be used to extend the framework. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41666-025-00199-4.

Indexed as

Co-designCo-productionDigital healthFrameworkParticipatory designWorkshop

Identifiers

PMID40726748
PMCPMC12290142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.