User-Centered Design of a Digitally Enabled Care Pathway in a Large Health System: Qualitative Interview Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Management of chronic conditions such as MDD can be improved by enhanced patient engagement, measurement-based care (MBC), and shared decision-making (SDM). A user-centered design approach can improve the understanding of the patient journey and care team workflows and thus aid the development of digital health care innovations optimized for the needs of patients living with MDD and their primary care teams. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to use qualitative research methods for the user-centered design of a digitally enabled MDD care platform, PathwayPlatform, intended to enhance patient engagement, MBC, and SDM. METHODS: Insights were gathered through 2 stages of qualitative interviews by a study team with expertise in qualitative research and user-centered design methods. Thematic analysis was used to generate an overarching understanding of a set of shared experiences, thoughts, or behaviors across a broad qualitative data set, including transcripts of interviews, to allow both inductive and deductive insights to emerge. Thematic analysis of interviews was supported by Dedoose (SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC), a qualitative data analysis software tool that enables systematized coding. Findings and insights were presented based on code frequency, salience, and relevance to the research project. RESULTS: In stage 1, interviews were conducted with 20 patients living with MDD and 15 health care providers from September 2018 to January 2019 to understand the experiences with and perceptions about the initial functionality of the Pathway app while also exploring the perceptions about potential additional features and functionality. Feedback about care team workflows and treatment approaches was collected in stage-2 interviews with 36 health care providers at 8 primary care sites. Inductive and deductive thematic analyses revealed several themes related to app functionality, patient-provider engagement, workflow integration, and patient education. Both patients and their care teams perceived the remote tracking of patient-reported outcomes via digital tools to be clinically useful and reliable and to promote MBC and SDM. However, there was emphasis on the need to enhance the flow of real-time data shared with the care team, improve trend visualizations, and integrate the data within the existing clinical workflow and educational programs for patients and their care teams. User feedback was incorporated into the iterative development of the Pathway app. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing communication with patients living with MDD and their care teams provided an opportunity for user-centric developmental iterations of the Pathway Platform. Key insights led to further development of the patient-facing and care team-facing visit preparation features, collaborative goal-setting and goal-tracking features, patient-reported outcome summaries, and trend visualizations. The result is an enhanced digital platform with the potential to improve treatment outcomes and provide patients living with MDD additional support throughout their treatment journey.
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) | 0.001 | 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".