Dataset Information

Assessing the application of human-centered design to translational research.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Human-centered design (HCD) training offers the potential to improve both team processes and products. However, the use of HCD to improve the quality of team science is a relatively recent application, and its benefits and challenges have not been rigorously evaluated. We conducted a qualitative study with health sciences researchers trained in HCD methods. We aimed to determine how researchers applied HCD methods and perceived the benefits and barriers to using HCD on research teams.

Methods

We conducted 1-hour, semi-structured interviews with trainees from three training cohorts. Interviews focused on perceptions of the training, subsequent uses of HCD, barriers and facilitators, and perceptions of the utility of HCD to science teams. Data analysis was conducted using Braun and Clarke's process for thematic analysis.

Results

We interviewed nine faculty and nine staff trained in HCD methods and identified four themes encompassing HCD use, benefits, challenges, and tensions between HCD approaches and academic culture.

Conclusions

Trainees found HCD relevant to research teams for stakeholder engagement, research design, project planning, meeting facilitation, and team management. They also described benefits of HCD in five distinct areas: creativity, egalitarianism, structure, efficiency, and visibility. Our data suggest that HCD has the potential to help researchers work more inclusively and collaboratively on interdisciplinary teams and generate more innovative and impactful science. The application of HCD methods is not without challenges; however, we believe these challenges can be overcome with institutional investment.

SUBMITTER: Norman MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8327548 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHuman-centered design (HCD) approaches to health care strive to support the development of innovative, effective, and person-centered solutions for health care. Although their use is increasing, there is no integral overview describing the details of HCD methods in health innovations.ObjectiveThis review aims to explore the current practices of HCD approaches for the development of health innovations, with the aim of providing an overview of the applied methods for participatory and HCD processes and highlighting their shortcomings for further research.MethodsA narrative review of health research was conducted based on systematic electronic searches in the PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts (2000-2020) databases using keywords related to human-centered design, design thinking (DT), and user-centered design (UCD). Abstracts and full-text articles were screened by 2 reviewers independently based on predefined inclusion criteria. Data extraction focused on the methodology used throughout the research process, the choice of methods in different phases of the innovation cycle, and the level of engagement of end users.ResultsThis review summarizes the application of HCD practices across various areas of health innovation. All approaches prioritized the user's needs and the participatory and iterative nature of the design process. The design processes comprised several design cycles during which multiple qualitative and quantitative methods were used in combination with specific design methods. HCD- and DT-based research primarily targeted understanding the research context and defining the problem, whereas UCD-based work focused mainly on the direct generation of solutions. Although UCD approaches involved end users primarily as testers and informants, HCD and DT approaches involved end users most often as design partners.ConclusionsWe have provided an overview of the currently applied methodologies and HCD guidelines to assist health care professionals and design researchers in their methodological choices. HCD-based techniques are challenging to evaluate using traditional biomedical research methods. Previously proposed reporting guidelines are a step forward but would require a level of detail that is incompatible with the current publishing landscape. Hence, further development is needed in this area. Special focus should be placed on the congruence between the chosen methods, design strategy, and achievable outcomes. Furthermore, power dimensions, agency, and intersectionality need to be considered in co-design sessions with multiple stakeholders, especially when including vulnerable groups.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough eHealth technology makes it possible to improve the management of complex health care systems and follow up on chronic patients, it is not without challenges, thus requiring the development of efficient programs and graphic user interface (GUI) features. Similar information technology tools are crucial, as health care populations are going to have to endure social distancing measures in the forthcoming months and years.ObjectiveThis study aims to provide adequate and personalized support to complex health care populations by developing a specific web-based mobile app. The app is designed around the patient and adapted to specific groups, for example, people with complex or rare diseases, autism, or disabilities (especially among children) as well as Alzheimer or senile dementia. The app's core features include the collection, labeling, analysis, and sorting of clinical data. Furthermore, it authorizes a network of people around the patient to securely access the data contained in his or her electronic health record.MethodsThe application was designed according to the paradigms of patient-centered care and user-centered design (UCD). It considers the patient as the main empowered and motivating factor in the management of his or her well-being. Implementation was informed through a family needs and technology perception assessment. We used 3 interdisciplinary focus groups and 2 assessment surveys to study the contexts of app use, subpopulation management, and preferred functions. Finally, we developed an observational study involving 116 enrolled patients and 253 system users, followed by 2 feedback surveys to evaluate the performance and impact of the app.ResultsIn the validated general GUI, we developed 10 user profiles with different privacy settings. We tested 81 functions and studied a modular structure based on disease or medical area. This allowed us to identify replicable methods to be applied to module design. The observational study not only showed good family and community engagement but also revealed some limitations that need to be addressed. In total, 42 of 51 (82%) patients described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied. Health care providers reported facilitated communication with colleagues and the need to support data quality.ConclusionsThe experimented solution addressed some of the health system challenges mentioned by the World Health Organization: usability appears to be significantly improved when the GUI is designed according to patients' UCD mental models and when new media and medical literacy are promoted. This makes it possible to maximize the impact of eHealth products, thereby overcoming some crucial gaps reported in the literature. Two main features seemed to have potential benefit compared with other eHealth products: the modeling, within the app, of both the formal and informal health care support networks and the modular structure allowing for comorbidity management, both of which require further implementation.

Project description:We need more research projects that partner and engage with patients and family members as team members. Doing this requires that patients and family members set research priorities and fully participate in research teams. Models for this patient and family member engagement as research partners can help increase patient centered outcomes research. In this article, we describe how we have successfully engaged patients with kidney disease and family members as Co-Investigators on a 5-year research project testing a health system intervention to improve kidney disease care. Background This article describes a method for successful engagement of patients and family members in all stages of a 5-year comparative effectiveness research trial to improve transitions of care for patients from chronic kidney disease to end-stage kidney disease. Methods This project utilized the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's conceptual model for engagement with patients and family members. We conducted a qualitative analysis of grant planning meetings to determine patient and family member Co-Investigators' priorities for research and to include these engagement efforts in the research design. Patient and family member Co-Investigators partnered in writing this paper. Results Patients and family members were successfully engaged in remote and in-person meetings to contribute actively to research planning and implementation stages. Three patient-centered themes emerged from our data related to engagement that informed our research plan: kidney disease treatment decision-making, care transitions from chronic to end-stage kidney disease, and patient-centered outcomes. Conclusions The model we have employed represents a new paradigm for kidney disease research in the United States, with patients and family members engaged as full research partners. As a result, the study tests an intervention that directly responds to their needs, and it prioritizes the collection of outcomes data most relevant to patient and family member Co-Investigators. Trial registration NCT02722382 .