SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2025
Examining Challenges to Co-Design Digital Health Interventions With End Users: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nurse-Led Digital Intervention for Sodium Restriction in Chronic Kidney Disease: Mixed Methods Implementation Study.JMIR nursing · 2026Trial
- From Prototype to Practice: Mixed Methods Study of Human-Centered Design and Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality for Complex Oncology Surgical Workflows.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence, eHealth, and Telemedicine in Precision Medicine: From Digital Innovation to Clinical Integration.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating Digital Health Innovation: The Case for Person-Centred Care Metrics Alongside Efficiency.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Designing for all: A scoping review and critical analysis on how digital mental health interventions serve (or fail) diverse women.Internet interventions · 2026Review
- Co-Designing a Clinician-Centered Video Gait Assessment System for Cerebral Palsy Based on the Framework for Co-Design of Clinical Practice Tools: Iterative Development and Formative Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development of a Data-Enabled Mixed Method for Designing for Patients From a Human-Centered Design Perspective: Explorative Case Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Development and Preliminary Evaluation of the OCODES Digital Strategy in Response to Health Misinformation: Nominal Group Technique and Retrospective Usability Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Centering Equity During Health Technology Innovation: Scoping Review of Methods and Research Adjustments to Promote Inclusive Coproduction.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Gamified Assessment of Cognitive Impulsivity in Eating Disorders and Mental Ill-Health: Mixed Methods Study Incorporating Lived Experience Co-Design and Evaluation.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- Evaluating a Digital Chronic Condition Prevention Intervention (THRIVE) in Australian General Practice: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study (ePREVENT-360).JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Co-Creation, Translation, and Localization of a Trauma-Informed Digital Mental Health Intervention for Frontline Workers: Protocol for a Multi-Country Feasibility Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Building EVA (Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Co-Design of Smartphone- and Smartwatch-Based Occupational Health Visualisations in Office Environments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Developing mHealth IT for Older Adult Medication Safety: Remote Participatory Co-Design Using the RAPID Method.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Adapting Interventions for Home Hospice Caregivers Using Digital Health Innovation.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Exploring Factors Associated With the Stalled Implementation of a Ground-Up Electronic Health Record System in South Africa: Qualitative Insights From the E-Tick Case Study Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Theory-informed design and dissemination of multilingual menopause CoMICs: the Menopause MEET initiative.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Reframing Person-Centered Fundamental Care in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Posthumanization: A Theory-Informed Narrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Data-driven closed-loop health education: constructing an integrated assessment-intervention-feedback pathway for digital COPD management-a perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital health interventions (DHIs) are changing the dynamic of health care by providing personalized, private, and instantaneous solutions to end users. However, the explosion of digital health has been fraught with challenges. The approach to co-design with end users varies across a diverse domain of stakeholders, often resulting in siloed approaches with no clear consensus. The concept of validating user experiences contrasts greatly between digital stakeholders (ie, user experience and retention) and health stakeholders (ie, safety and efficacy). Several methodologies and frameworks are being implemented to address this challenge to varying degrees of success.
objectiveWe aimed to broadly examine the advancements and challenges to co-design DHIs with end users over the last decade. This task was undertaken to identify the key problem areas at the domain level, with the ultimate goal of creating recommendations for better approaches to co-design DHIs with end users.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of key databases for co-design studies involving end users in DHIs. Searches were divided into 3 relevant streams: health behavior, user experience, and digital methodologies and frameworks. The eligibility criteria were guided by the PerSPEcTiF framework and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist. In line with this framework, studies were included in this review that (1) address research on DHIs; (2) focus on interaction and co-design with end users; (3) explain results such that uptake, effectiveness, satisfaction, and health outcomes are discernible, positively or negatively; and (4) describe actionable procedures for better DHI design. The search was conducted in a diverse group of 6 bibliographical databases from January 2015 to May 2024: PsycINFO, PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, CINAHL, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, and Scopus. From the 13,961 studies initially screened for titles and abstracts, 489 (3.6%) were eligible for a full-text screening, of which 171 (1.2%) studies matched the inclusion criteria and were included in a qualitative synthesis.
resultsOf the 171 studies analyzed across 52 journals, we found 5 different research approaches, spanning 8 different digital health solution types and 5 different design methodologies. These studies identified several core themes when co-designing with end users: advancements, which included participatory co-design; challenges, which included participatory co-design, environment and context, testing, and cost and scale; and gaps, which included a pragmatic hybridized framework and industry implementability.
conclusionsThis research supports a pragmatic shift toward using mixed methods approaches at scale, methods that are primed to take advantage of the emerging big data era of digital health co-design. This organic outlook should blend the vision of digital health co-designers with the pragmatism of Agile design methodology and the rigor of health care metrics.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021238164; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021238164. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/28083.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.