ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
Putting FUN into involvement: feedback user needs in the design of a mobile phone app for people with long-term conditions.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Involving users in the design of health mobile phone apps is important to their success. This article reports on the involvement activities of people with long-term health conditions in a project called P-STEP. This is a unique project combining health and environmental data within a mobile phone app to offer advice to people with long-term conditions on walking time and where to walk to avoid air pollution. The article aims to highlight a locally created involvement approach called FUN (Feedback User Needs) and to showcase the difference this made both to the end product (the mobile phone app prototype) and to the user’s experience (how users felt about being involved in the project). Firstly, by focusing on the discussion groups and validation workshops, the article will show how users made a difference and had an impact on the design. Secondly, users contributed to the writing of this article and provided written narratives of their experiences. These experiences are used to reflect on the quality and consistency of our approach with users and what made a positive difference to them in being involved. Overall, the FUN approach was successful in ensuring that user contributions influenced the design of the app and provided a positive experience of the project. We offer this approach as an example of involving users in the design of a health mobile phone app and the methods for encouraging positive involvement outcomes in similar projects.
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.