Using human-centered design to advance health literacy in local health department programming: a case study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Adriane Ackerman, Brittany Nigon, Alexis Wait, Elham Ali, Ada M Wilkinson-Lee, Alexia Cohen, Meredith Jones, Imelda G Cortez, Katrina Kelly, Robert Fabricant, Jenitza Serrano-Feliciano, Jennifer Stanowski, Theresa Cullen
{"title":"Using human-centered design to advance health literacy in local health department programming: a case study.","authors":"Adriane Ackerman, Brittany Nigon, Alexis Wait, Elham Ali, Ada M Wilkinson-Lee, Alexia Cohen, Meredith Jones, Imelda G Cortez, Katrina Kelly, Robert Fabricant, Jenitza Serrano-Feliciano, Jennifer Stanowski, Theresa Cullen","doi":"10.1186/s12889-025-22491-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Human-centered design (HCD) and behavioral science are structured, evidence-based methodologies used to develop and evaluate community-driven interventions. While HCD focuses on deeply understanding user needs and co-designing solutions, behavioral science applies empirically tested principles to drive behavior change. Together, these methodologies enable the development of interventions that are both user-centered and behaviorally informed. The Pima County Health Department and project partners leveraged these collaborative methodologies to assemble a Community of Practice to improve health literacy and adherence to COVID-19 public health practices among Hispanic/Latine individuals of childbearing age and ability in Pima County.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Human-centered design processes identified and evaluated barriers facing the target population. On the basis of these findings, two pilot interventions were implemented between July 2023 and November 2023: one in a clinical setting with 92 participants and another in a community setting with 207 participants. A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the impact of these pilots. Quantitatively, a pre-post evaluation and survey design estimated the effect of an intervention by comparing outcomes before and after implementation using paired t-test and chi-square tests. Qualitatively, structured post intervention interviews were conducted with participants who were randomly selected based upon their initial consent and willingness to participate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants in the clinical and community pilots perceived fewer barriers to health-seeking behaviors after the intervention. Both pilots increased participants' confidence in health-seeking behaviors (p < 0.01). Only the clinical pilot resulted in an increase in health literacy. In the clinical pilot, the number of unvaccinated participants decreased, and the number of participants who reported needing a booster increased. The community pilot did not find a statistically significant difference in COVID-19 vaccine uptake.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Integrating human-centered design and behavioral science into public health interventions can improve health literacy and confidence in health-seeking behaviors among historically and contemporarily excluded populations. Local health departments can use these methods to develop multicomponent interventions that foster mutual co-invention with communities and improve population health outcomes. Future research should focus on long-term impacts and explore broader applications of these approaches in different contexts.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This project received University of Arizona IRB review and approval. This study was not considered a randomized controlled trial and did not require registration.</p>","PeriodicalId":9039,"journal":{"name":"BMC Public Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"1207"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-22491-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Human-centered design (HCD) and behavioral science are structured, evidence-based methodologies used to develop and evaluate community-driven interventions. While HCD focuses on deeply understanding user needs and co-designing solutions, behavioral science applies empirically tested principles to drive behavior change. Together, these methodologies enable the development of interventions that are both user-centered and behaviorally informed. The Pima County Health Department and project partners leveraged these collaborative methodologies to assemble a Community of Practice to improve health literacy and adherence to COVID-19 public health practices among Hispanic/Latine individuals of childbearing age and ability in Pima County.

Methods: Human-centered design processes identified and evaluated barriers facing the target population. On the basis of these findings, two pilot interventions were implemented between July 2023 and November 2023: one in a clinical setting with 92 participants and another in a community setting with 207 participants. A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the impact of these pilots. Quantitatively, a pre-post evaluation and survey design estimated the effect of an intervention by comparing outcomes before and after implementation using paired t-test and chi-square tests. Qualitatively, structured post intervention interviews were conducted with participants who were randomly selected based upon their initial consent and willingness to participate.

Results: Participants in the clinical and community pilots perceived fewer barriers to health-seeking behaviors after the intervention. Both pilots increased participants' confidence in health-seeking behaviors (p < 0.01). Only the clinical pilot resulted in an increase in health literacy. In the clinical pilot, the number of unvaccinated participants decreased, and the number of participants who reported needing a booster increased. The community pilot did not find a statistically significant difference in COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Conclusions: Integrating human-centered design and behavioral science into public health interventions can improve health literacy and confidence in health-seeking behaviors among historically and contemporarily excluded populations. Local health departments can use these methods to develop multicomponent interventions that foster mutual co-invention with communities and improve population health outcomes. Future research should focus on long-term impacts and explore broader applications of these approaches in different contexts.

Trial registration: This project received University of Arizona IRB review and approval. This study was not considered a randomized controlled trial and did not require registration.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Public Health
BMC Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.40%
发文量
2108
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Public Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on the epidemiology of disease and the understanding of all aspects of public health. The journal has a special focus on the social determinants of health, the environmental, behavioral, and occupational correlates of health and disease, and the impact of health policies, practices and interventions on the community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信