Human-Centered Design of a Digital Health Tool to Promote Effective Self-care in Patients With Heart Failure: Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Effective self-care is an important factor in the successful management of patients with heart failure (HF). Despite the importance of self-care, most patients with HF are not adequately taught the wide range of skills required to become proficient in self-care. Digital health technology (DHT) may provide a novel solution to support patients at home in effective self-care, with the view to enhancing the quality of life and ultimately improving patient outcomes. However, many of the solutions developed to date have failed to consider users' perspectives at the point of design, resulting in poor effectiveness. Leveraging a human-centered design (HCD) approach to the development of DHTs may lead to the successful promotion of self-care behaviors in patients with HF. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to outline the HCD, development, and evaluation process of a DHT designed to promote effective self-care in patients with HF. METHODS: A design thinking approach within the HCD framework was undertaken, as described in the International Organization for Standardization 9241-210:2019 regulations, using a 5-step process: empathize, ideate, design, develop, and test. Patients with HF were involved throughout the design and evaluation of the system. The designed system was grounded in behavior change theory using the Theoretical Domains Framework and included behavior change techniques. Mixed methods were used to evaluate the DHT during the testing phase. RESULTS: Steps 1 to 3 of the process resulted in a set of evidence- and user-informed design requirements that were carried forward into the iterative development of a version 1 system. A cross-platform (iOS and Android) mobile app integrated with Fitbit activity trackers and smart scales was developed. A 2-week user testing phase highlighted the ease of use of the system, with patients demonstrating excellent adherence. Qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews identified the early potential for the system to positively influence self-care. Specifically, users perceived that the system increased their confidence and motivation to engage in key self-care behaviors, provided them with skills and knowledge that made them more aware of the importance of self-care behaviors, and might facilitate timely help seeking. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an HCD methodology in this research has resulted in the development of a DHT that may engage patients with HF and potentially affect their self-care behaviors. This comprehensive work lays the groundwork for further development and evaluation of this solution before its implementation in health care systems. A detailed description of the HCD process used in this research will help guide the development and evaluation of future DHTs across a range of disease use cases.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".