Integration of Conversion Factors for the Development of an Inclusive eHealth Tool With Caregivers of Functionally Dependent Older Persons: Social Justice Design

Citizen involvement in research on technological innovations for health, care or well-being: a scoping review

Citizen science can be a powerful approach to foster the successful implementation of technological innovations in health, care or well-being. Involving experience experts as co-researchers or co-designers of technological innovations facilitates mutual learning, community building, and empowerment. By utilizing the expert knowledge of the intended users, innovations have a better chance to get adopted and solve complex health-related problems. As citizen science is still a relatively new practice for health and well-being, little is known about effective methods and guidelines for successful collaboration. This scoping review aims to provide insight in (1) the levels of citizen involvement in current research on technological innovations for health, care or well-being, (2) the used participatory methodologies, and (3) lesson's learned by the researchers.A scoping review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search was performed in SCOPUS in January 2021 and included peer-reviewed journal and conference papers published between 2016 and 2020. The final selection (N = 83) was limited to empirical studies that had a clear focus on technological innovations for health, care or well-being and involved citizens at the level of collaboration or higher. Our results show a growing interest in citizens science as an inclusive research approach. Citizens are predominantly involved in the design phase of innovations and less in the preparation, data-analyses or reporting phase. Eight records had citizens in the lead in one of the research phases.Researcher use different terms to describe their methodological approach including participatory design, co-design, community based participatory research, co-creation, public and patient involvement, partcipatory action research, user-centred design and citizen science. Our selection of cases shows that succesful citizen science projects develop a structural and longitudinal partnership with their collaborators, use a situated and adaptive research approach, and have researchers that are willing to abandon traditional power dynamics and engage in a mutual learning experience.

Co-created Technological Solutions for Caregivers in Health Care: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Support interventions for caregivers can reduce their stress, possibly improving the quality of patients' care while reducing care costs. Technological solutions have been designed to cover their needs, but there are some challenges in making them truly functional for end users. Co-design approaches present important opportunities for engaging diverse populations to help ensure that technological solutions are inclusive and accessible.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify co-created technological solutions, as well as the process followed for their co-creation, in the field of health for caregivers.

METHODS

The literature review was conducted in the Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, Scielo, and IEEE Xplore databases. The inclusion criteria were studies written in English or Spanish and with a publication date until May 2021. The content had to specify that the caregivers actively participated in the co-creation process, which covered until the development phase of the technological solution (prototype). The level of evidence and the methodological quality were analyzed when possible, using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, version 2018, respectively.

RESULTS

In total, 410 papers were identified, and 11 met the eligibility criteria. The most predominant articles were mixed methods studies and qualitative studies. The technology used in the analyzed articles were mobile or web applications (9 studies) and specific devices such as sensors, cameras, or alarm systems (2 studies) to support the health and social aspects of caregivers and improve their education in care. The most common patient profile was older people (7 studies); 6 studies used co-creation in the requirements phase, 6 studies detailed the design phase. In 9 studies, the prototype was iteratively refined in the development phase, and the validation phase was performed in 5 of the reviewed studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that existing co-created technological solutions in the field of health for caregivers are mostly mobile or web applications to support caregivers' social health and well-being and improve their health knowledge when delivering care to patients, especially older people. As for the co-creation process, caregivers are particularly involved during development and in the design. The scarce literature found indicates that further research with higher methodological quality is needed.

A Systematic Review of Design Workshops for Health Information Technologies

Background: Design workshops offer effective methods in eliciting end-user participation from design inception to completion. Workshops unite stakeholders in the utilization of participatory methods, coalescing in the best possible creative solutions. Objective: This systematic review aimed to identify design approaches whilst providing guidance to health information technology designers/researchers in devising and organizing workshops. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in five medical/library databases identifying 568 articles. The initial duplication removal resulted in 562 articles. A criteria-based screening of the title field, abstracts, and pre-full-texts reviews resulted in 72 records for full-text review. The final review resulted in 10 article exclusions. Results: 62 publications were included in the review. These studies focused on consumer facing and clinical health information technologies. The studied technologies involved both clinician and patients and encompassed an array of health conditions. Diverse workshop activities and deliverables were reported. Only seven publications reported workshop evaluation data. Discussion: This systematic review focused on workshops as a design and research activity in the health informatics domain. Our review revealed three themes: (1) There are a variety of ways of conducting design workshops; (2) Workshops are effective design and research approaches; (3) Various levels of workshop details were reported.

Co-Design to Support the Development of Inclusive eHealth Tools for Caregivers of Functionally Dependent Older Persons: Social Justice Design

BACKGROUND

eHealth can help reduce social health inequalities (SHIs) as much as it can exacerbate them. Taking a co-design approach to the development of eHealth tools has the potential to ensure that these tools are inclusive. Although the importance of involving future users in the development of eHealth tools to reduce SHIs is highlighted in the scientific literature, the challenges associated with their participation question the benefits of this involvement as co-designers in a real-world context.

OBJECTIVE

On the basis of Amartya Sen's theoretical framework of social justice, the aim of this study is to explore how co-design can support the development of an inclusive eHealth tool for caregivers of functionally dependent older persons.

METHODS

This study is based on a social justice design and participant observation as part of a large-scale research project funded by the Ministry of Families as part of the Age-Friendly Quebec Program (Québec Ami des Aînés). The analysis was based on the method developed by Miles and Huberman and on Paillé's analytical questioning method.

RESULTS

A total of 78 people participated in 11 co-design sessions in 11 Quebec regions. A total of 24 preparatory meetings and 11 debriefing sessions were required to complete this process. Co-designers participated in the creation of a prototype to support the search for formal services for caregivers. The majority of participants (except for 2) significantly contributed to the tool's designing. They also incorporated conversion factors to ensure the inclusiveness of the eHealth tool, such as an adequate level of digital literacy and respect for the caregiver's help-seeking process. In the course of the experiment, the research team's position regarding its role in co-design evolved from a neutral posture and promoting co-designer participation to one that was more pragmatic.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of co-design involving participants at risk of SHIs does not guarantee innovation, but it does guarantee that the tool developed will comply with their process of help-seeking and their literacy level. Time issues interfere with efforts to carry out a democratic process in its ideal form. It would be useful to single out some key issues to guide researchers on what should be addressed in co-design discussions and what can be left out to make optimal use of this approach in a real-world context.