An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described

Alicia Kilfoy; Ting-Chen Chloe Hsu; Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell; Pauline Whelan; Charlene H Chu; Lindsay Jibb

doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01385-1

An umbrella review on how digital health intervention co-design is conducted and described

NPJ Digit Med. 2024 Dec 23;7(1):374. doi: 10.1038/s41746-024-01385-1.

Authors

Alicia Kilfoy^{1

2

3}, Ting-Chen Chloe Hsu⁴, Charlotte Stockton-Powdrell⁵, Pauline Whelan⁶, Charlene H Chu^{1

7}, Lindsay Jibb^{1

2

3}

Affiliations

¹ Lawrence Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, 155 College St, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada.
² Division of Hematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, 170 Elizabeth St, Toronto, ON, M5G 1E8, Canada.
³ Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay St, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada.
⁴ Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.
⁵ Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Imaging, Informatics and Data Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
⁶ Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Imaging, Informatics and Data Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. [email protected].
⁷ KITE Research Institute, University Health Network, 550 University Avenue #12-165, Toronto, ON, M5G 2A2, Canada.

Abstract

Co-design has been suggested to improve intervention effectiveness and sustainability. However, digital health intervention co-design is inconsistently reported. This umbrella review aims to synthesize what is known about co-design of digital health interventions. We searched five databases from inception. Reviews which reported on co-design methodologies used in digital health were eligible. Information on review type, health conditions, and reported specifics of co-design were extracted and synthesized. Methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR2 tool. We included 21 reviews published between 2015 and 2023. Co-design participants included patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals. The frequency and breadth of participant involvement in co-design activities were reported in less than half of reviews. Participants evaluated intervention co-design as a positive process. All reviews were rated as critically low quality. This umbrella review highlights the inconsistent reporting of co-design in digital health. Here, we emphasize the importance of creating guidelines to direct co-design activities.