ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
Time for Clarity in Exploring the Evidence and Key Concepts of Human-Centered Design in Digital Health Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman-centered design (HCD) methodologies such as design thinking (DT), user-centered design, cocreation, and participatory design (PD) have been adopted to facilitate user and stakeholder involvement in the development of eHealth applications. However, there is frequent confusion around these methodologies, leading to the fragmentation of the discourse and limited integration opportunities. The absence of an empirically grounded framework for HCD limits research and theoretical consensus, particularly in the highly regulated context of eHealth solution development. For this scoping review, the term HCD will be used as an umbrella term, under which the terms user-centered design, patient-centered design, cocreation, co-design, PD, and DT will be used in this protocol.
objectiveIn this paper, we describe a protocol for a scoping review that aims to explore and analyze the scope, definitions, key concepts, and motivations reported in peer-reviewed studies that have applied stakeholder engagement methods such as HCD, PD, or DT in developing eHealth applications.
methodsA team of 3 reviewers will conduct this scoping review to identify and synthesize key concepts at the intersection of HCD methodologies and their application to the development of eHealth applications. We will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and the guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering. The reporting of the results will be guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) extension. This review will include only primary studies reporting on the experience, challenges, and applicability of HCD for the design and development of eHealth applications, identified through the PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ACM Digital Library databases, and limited to articles from the past 10 years.
resultsA preliminary search applying the search strategy resulted in 826 records. The search was initiated in March 2025. Title and abstract screening will conclude by mid-2025, followed by full-text screening, data extraction, and analysis in the second half of 2025. Results are expected to be submitted for publication in the first half of 2026.
conclusionsThis protocol describes a systematic approach for conducting a scoping literature review, aimed at synthesizing definitions, concepts, and methodologies related to HCD in eHealth application development. This review aims to identify research gaps and trends to guide the future of mobile health innovation, with a focus on improving adoption and long-term sustainability, particularly from the perspective of technologies for vulnerable populations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/74067.
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.