ArticleJMIR human factors2026
User-Centered Design for Digital Patient-Navigation Tools in Oncology: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNavigation programs for patients with cancer improve access and continuity of care, yet their digital transformation is often limited by poor usability and inadequate uptake. Applying user-centered and human-centered design (UCD/HCD) principles may close this gap, but the extent to which such design methods are used and evaluated in oncology navigation tools remains unclear.
objectiveThis scoping review identifies how UCD/HCD principles have been, and should be, applied in developing and implementing digital health tools for navigation for patients with cancer.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) and Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. A total of 7 databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, Embase, ACM Digital Library, and CINAHL) were searched for English-language articles published between January 2015 and July 2025. Eligible studies reported original, peer-reviewed research on digital or mobile health interventions linked to cancer navigation and documented at least 1 UCD/HCD activity. Two reviewers independently screened records and charted data on context, target users, functions, tool modality, design phase, methods, and outcomes. Findings were synthesized descriptively and thematically.
resultsA total of 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. Findings were organized into 4 domains: study characteristics, navigation functions and digital modalities, design processes and methods, and UCD/HCD application. Iterative prototyping and usability testing were the most common, while participatory design and implementation evaluation were underused.
conclusionsUCD/HCD approaches enhance usability and patient relevance of digital cancer navigation tools. However, their application remains limited across cancer types, regions, and functions. Broader stakeholder participation and evaluation beyond usability are needed to strengthen coordination, equity, and sustainability in cancer care.
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.