Evidence mapPaperPMID 42468949Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Human-centred design of digital health dashboards in care of older adults: a scoping review.

Syeda Taqya Amna Arslan, Siobhan O'Connor, Bibhusha Karki, Chloe French, Emma Stanmore

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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

5 authors.

Syeda Taqya Amna ArslanSchool of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK taqya.arslan@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9274-3298
Siobhan O'ConnorFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8579-1718
Bibhusha KarkiSchool of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Chloe FrenchSchool of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Emma StanmoreSchool of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4522-5292

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis review explores the conceptual frameworks, methods, barriers and facilitators associated with the human-centred design (HCD) process employed when developing digital health dashboards (DHDs) for the care of older adults.

designThis scoping review is designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, ensuring a systematic approach to identifying and synthesising relevant literature. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched including EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Cochrane Library from January 2012 to 30 March 2026. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were eligible if they involved the HCD of DHDs for health management in older adults aged 60 years and over. The design process could involve a range of stakeholders, including older adults, healthcare professionals, carers, technology experts and other relevant parties involved in dashboard design. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Search terms included older persons, ageing, decision support systems, dashboards, human-centred design etc. Study screening was done in Rayyan, and data extraction was conducted in MS Excel using the Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction tool. HCD approaches were mapped to the Double Diamond framework using thematic analysis.

resultsA total of 15 studies were included which employed iterative HCD approaches, involving stakeholders at various stages of dashboard development. Several conceptual frameworks were identified including user-centred design and behaviour change frameworks as well as HCD methods identified including user interviews, focus groups, co-design workshops, usability testing and surveys. Key facilitators included ongoing user engagement, multidisciplinary collaboration and iterative prototyping. Barriers included limited digital literacy among older adults, challenges in recruiting diverse user groups and resource constraints impacting the breadth of HCD activities.

conclusionDashboards developed using HCD approaches suggest improved usability, acceptability and relevance for older adults, supporting better self-management of health conditions. However, inconsistent frameworks, lack of research outside Europe, America and Australia and underuse of dashboard analytics were identified as challenges. Future research should adopt validated HCD frameworks, address acceptability factors and evaluate real-world use to develop more inclusive and sustainable digital health tools for older adults.

Indexed as

User-Centered DesignAgedDashboard SystemsDigital HealthHumansAgingDecision MakingDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedDigital TechnologyeHealthHealth Services for the Aged

Identifiers

PMID42468949
PMCPMC13384139

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.