Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42709710›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

User-centered design and related participatory approaches in digital health innovations for low-resource settings: A scoping review protocol.

Emmanuel Otukpa, Abdhalla Ziraba, Christopher Pell, Ben Ngoye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Emmanuel OtukpaHealth Systems Strengthening Hub, Institute of Healthcare Management, Strathmore Business School, Strathmore University, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9370-3500
Abdhalla ZirabaEmerging and Re-emerging Infectious Disease Unit, Health and Wellbeing Theme, African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC), Nairobi, Kenya.
Christopher PellDepartment of Global Health, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ben NgoyeHealth Systems Strengthening Hub, Institute of Healthcare Management, Strathmore Business School, Strathmore University, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe primary objective of this scoping review is to identify and synthesize the existing evidence on the applications, reported outcomes, and key methodological considerations of user-centered design (UCD) and related participatory design methodologies including human centered design (HCD), co-design, participatory design and co-creation of digital health innovations within resource constrained settings.

introductionA critical challenge in global health is the high failure rate of technologically sound innovations. This is due in part to insufficient consideration of the end-user's environment, literacy levels, and socio-cultural beliefs. UCD is an iterative design process that grounds development in an understanding of the user's needs, contexts, and feedback. It sits within a wider family of related approaches such as HCD, co-design, participatory designs and co-creation, while related to UCD, is distinguished by its emphasis on equitable partnership, where end-users are not merely informants but co-designers and co-developers of the innovation. These approaches have emerged as promising methodologies to develop more relevant, acceptable, and sustainable digital health solutions. In disease diagnostics, despite increasing interest, there is lack of a consolidated review mapping the full scope of how these methodologies are applied, across which types of digital health and diagnostic innovations, and with what outcomes. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies conducted in low-resource settings, published between 2015 and 2026 that apply UCD or a related participatory design methodology to the development, adaptation or evaluation of a digital health innovation and, where reported, outcomes such as usability, patient satisfaction, innovation success, adoption, scalability and sustainability. Studies that name such an approach without describing the activities undertaken are also eligible, and the completeness of reporting will be recorded and reported as a finding of this review.

methodsGuided by the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR, we will search MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, the ACM Digital Library, the WHO Global Index Medicus, and Google Scholar, together with named grey literature sources, for peer-reviewed articles, conference proceedings, and grey literature published in English and French from 2015 to 2026. Data extraction will include information on study characteristics, the design approaches and processes applied, the completeness with which they are reported as well as the outcomes.

Indexed as

Digital HealthUser-Centered DesignHumansResource-Limited SettingsScoping Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID42709710
PMCPMC13552726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.