Self-Care Needs and Technology Preferences Among Parents in Marginalized Communities: Participatory Design Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ten million parents provide unpaid care to children living with chronic conditions, such as asthma, and a high percentage of these parents are in marginalized communities, including racial and ethnic minority and low-income families. There is an urgent need to develop technology-enabled tailored solutions to support the self-care needs of these parents. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to use a participatory design approach to describe and compare Latino and non-Latino parents' current self-care practices, needs, and technology preferences when caring for children with asthma in marginalized communities. METHODS: The participatory design approach was used to actively engage intended users in the design process and empower them to identify needs and generate design ideas to meet those needs. RESULTS: Thirteen stakeholders participated in three design sessions. We described Latino and non-Latino parents' similarities in self-care practices and cultural-specific preferences. When coming up with ideas of technologies for self-care, non-Latino parents focused on improving caregiving stress through journaling, daily affirmations, and tracking feelings, while Latino parents focused more on relaxation and entertainment. CONCLUSIONS: Considerations need to be taken beyond language differences when developing technology-enabled interventions for diverse populations. The community partnership approach strengthened the study's inclusive design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".