Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40701778›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025

Consumer Involvement in the Co-Design of Diabetes Self-Management Smartphone Apps: A Scoping Review.

Christie L Martin, Caitlin J Bakker, Sayantani Sarkar, Rachael M Kang, Nick F H Reid, Ming-Yuan Chih, Scott Sittig, Grace Gao, Corey B Smith, Brad Morse and 3 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Christie L MartinSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1685-0205
Caitlin J BakkerDr. John Archer Library and Archives, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4154-8382
Sayantani SarkarYale School of Nursing, Yale University, Orange, Connecticut, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3003-7096
Rachael M KangDepartment of Information Sciences, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-4474-7415
Nick F H ReidDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington Seattle, Washington, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6649-3333
Ming-Yuan ChihCollege of Health Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7130-1415
Scott SittigDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Lafayette, Louisiana, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7179-152X
Grace GaoSchool of Nursing, Saint Catherine University, Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9198-1198
Corey B SmithDepartment of Pathology, University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Grand Forks, North Dakota, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4739-7960
Brad MorseSchool of Medicine-General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1080-3961
Katherine K KimDepartment of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California Davis, Davis, California, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5766-3938
Liliana LaranjoWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1020-3402
Velma L PayneKasiska Division of Health Sciences, Department of Community and Public Health, Idaho State University, Meridian, Idaho, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-9342-0523

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Consumer involvement in the co-design of diabetes self-management smartphone apps is vital. This scoping review explored how consumers are involved in the co-design processes and methods and approaches guiding this research.Our review was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework, PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and Witteman and colleagues' 11-item user-centered design (UCD-11) framework. We searched literature across five databases and examined types of consumer involvement in co-design and frequency of methods and approaches (i.e., co-design approaches, behavioral theories, and other frameworks), synthesizing findings in SPSS and Excel.Of the 14,206 initial items, 283 articles were included. Most studies were conducted in Asia (33.2%) and focused on type 2 diabetes (43.1%). All articles addressed at least one UCD principle, and prototype evaluation (UCD-3) was the most frequent (82.3%); 85.2% addressed iterative responsiveness (factor 2). Most articles (66.8%) did not report a particular method or approach; 20.5% used design-related approaches, with user-centered design being the most common (7.4%). Few articles (3.9%) utilized social cognitive theory.Overall, co-design activities were isolated by phase. Consumers were primarily involved in evaluating prototypes and had limited engagement in the early stages. Iterative responsiveness factor activities were underreported or limited in scope. The use of approaches, theories, and frameworks was inconsistent. Consumer involvement in the co-design of diabetes self-management apps is often limited to later phases, with minimal engagement during the critical preprototype phase. To enhance the relevance, effectiveness, and adoption of diabetes self-management apps, app designers should improve the reporting of co-design activities and engage consumers across all co-design phases.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationDiabetes MellitusMobile ApplicationsSelf-ManagementSmartphoneHumansUser-Centered Design

Identifiers

PMID40701778
PMCPMC12286709

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.