Digital Health Co-Design
Implementation
This implementation framework that can help you navigate the complex process of co-designing by highlighting the barriers and facilitators to creating a new healthcare technology with patients, informal carers, the public, and health or care professionals.
The short video animation on the right helps explain the barriers and facilitators listed in this methods toolkit that influence the digital health co-design process.
BARRIERS
Contextual limitations
-
The intervention was only designed or tested in the specific context so not applicable to other contexts (Ray et al., 2019)
Infrastructural limitations
-
Platform, device and technical constraints (Allemann et al., 2023)
Lack of flexibility
-
The predefined co-design procedure and aims, and misalignment between research priorities and community needs (Buck et al., 2023)
Limited external validity
-
Lack of diversity of the sample (Stuart et al., 2023)
-
Lack of representativeness of the sample (Ray et al., 2019)
-
Small sample size (Dimeff et al., 2020)
-
Power dynamics in group activities
-
Selection bias (Stawarz et al., 2023)
-
Reporting bias (Catalani et al., 2014)
Stakeholder coordination limitations
-
Spatial and temporal coordination barrier (Reeder et al., 2014)
-
Language and cultural differences between stakeholder groups (Perez-Aronsson et al., 2022)
-
Lack of relational trust (Szymanski et al., 2023)
Stakeholder engagement limitations
-
Intense time requirement for the co-design process (Revenäs et al., 2014)
-
Attrition risk during the long co-design process (Allemann et al., 2023)
-
Lack of motivation to take part in co-design (Tiase et al., 2021)
-
Implicitness of needs (some stakeholders cannot specify or make it clear what they need) (Catalani et al., 2014)
-
Cognitive barrier (Hartzler et al., 2015)
Subjective nature of data
-
The inherently subjective nature of some usability principles (for instance, aesthetic and minimalist design) can result in variations in how the criteria are applied (Giunti et al., 2018)
Resource limitations
-
Time, funding, human resources constraints (Richardson et al., 2021; Hawsawi et al., 2023)
-
The contradiction between reliability and efficiency (Elbers et al., 2021)
FACILITATORS
Considering resources
-
Using easy and fast to develop and low-cost devices, such as cardboard (Singleton et al., 2022)
Coordination skills
-
Strong communication and collaboration skills (Prinsenberg et al., 2020)
Diverse data collection approaches
-
Using diverse collection approaches during co-design (Ben-Yehuda et al., 2022)
Inclusion and diversity
-
Multiple stakeholder groups involvement and boost participants EDI (Tran-Nguyen et al., 2022; Elbers et al., 2021)
Iterative design
-
Iterative design increases realiability and tranferability of study results and improves usability (Ghorayeb et al., 2023; Hartzler et al., 2023)
Motivated engagement
-
Involving key stakeholders who will benefit from the product (Reeder et al., 2014)
-
Allowing flexible participation (Ozanne et al., 2015)
-
Considering financial compensation for co-design activities (meal and travel etc.) (Kramer et al., 2021)
-
Keeping anonymity (Darley et al., 2022)
-
Creating trusted context (Boyd et al., 2021)