如何设计公平的数字健康工具:对设计策略、案例研究和机遇的叙述性回顾。

PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2024-08-22 eCollection Date: 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000591
Amy Bucher, Beenish M Chaudhry, Jean W Davis, Katharine Lawrence, Emily Panza, Manal Baqer, Rebecca T Feinstein, Sherecce A Fields, Jennifer Huberty, Deanna M Kaplan, Isabelle S Kusters, Frank T Materia, Susanna Y Park, Maura Kepper
{"title":"如何设计公平的数字健康工具:对设计策略、案例研究和机遇的叙述性回顾。","authors":"Amy Bucher, Beenish M Chaudhry, Jean W Davis, Katharine Lawrence, Emily Panza, Manal Baqer, Rebecca T Feinstein, Sherecce A Fields, Jennifer Huberty, Deanna M Kaplan, Isabelle S Kusters, Frank T Materia, Susanna Y Park, Maura Kepper","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With a renewed focus on health equity in the United States driven by national crises and legislation to improve digital healthcare innovation, there is a need for the designers of digital health tools to take deliberate steps to design for equity in their work. A concrete toolkit of methods to design for health equity is needed to support digital health practitioners in this aim. This narrative review summarizes several health equity frameworks to help digital health practitioners conceptualize the equity dimensions of importance for their work, and then provides design approaches that accommodate an equity focus. Specifically, the Double Diamond Model, the IDEAS framework and toolkit, and community collaboration techniques such as participatory design are explored as mechanisms for practitioners to solicit input from members of underserved groups and better design digital health tools that serve their needs. Each of these design methods requires a deliberate effort by practitioners to infuse health equity into the approach. A series of case studies that use different methods to build in equity considerations are offered to provide examples of how this can be accomplished and demonstrate the range of applications available depending on resources, budget, product maturity, and other factors. We conclude with a call for shared rigor around designing digital health tools that deliver equitable outcomes for members of underserved populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"3 8","pages":"e0000591"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340894/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to design equitable digital health tools: A narrative review of design tactics, case studies, and opportunities.\",\"authors\":\"Amy Bucher, Beenish M Chaudhry, Jean W Davis, Katharine Lawrence, Emily Panza, Manal Baqer, Rebecca T Feinstein, Sherecce A Fields, Jennifer Huberty, Deanna M Kaplan, Isabelle S Kusters, Frank T Materia, Susanna Y Park, Maura Kepper\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>With a renewed focus on health equity in the United States driven by national crises and legislation to improve digital healthcare innovation, there is a need for the designers of digital health tools to take deliberate steps to design for equity in their work. A concrete toolkit of methods to design for health equity is needed to support digital health practitioners in this aim. This narrative review summarizes several health equity frameworks to help digital health practitioners conceptualize the equity dimensions of importance for their work, and then provides design approaches that accommodate an equity focus. Specifically, the Double Diamond Model, the IDEAS framework and toolkit, and community collaboration techniques such as participatory design are explored as mechanisms for practitioners to solicit input from members of underserved groups and better design digital health tools that serve their needs. Each of these design methods requires a deliberate effort by practitioners to infuse health equity into the approach. A series of case studies that use different methods to build in equity considerations are offered to provide examples of how this can be accomplished and demonstrate the range of applications available depending on resources, budget, product maturity, and other factors. We conclude with a call for shared rigor around designing digital health tools that deliver equitable outcomes for members of underserved populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"volume\":\"3 8\",\"pages\":\"e0000591\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340894/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000591\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000591","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在国家危机和改善数字医疗创新立法的推动下,美国重新开始关注健康公平问题,因此数字医疗工具的设计者有必要采取审慎措施,在其工作中进行公平设计。我们需要一套具体的健康公平设计方法工具包,以支持数字医疗从业者实现这一目标。本综述总结了几个健康公平框架,以帮助数字健康从业者从概念上理解对其工作具有重要意义的公平维度,然后提供了适应公平重点的设计方法。具体来说,本文探讨了双钻模型、IDEAS 框架和工具包,以及参与式设计等社区合作技术,作为从业人员征求服务不足群体成员意见的机制,并更好地设计出满足他们需求的数字医疗工具。每一种设计方法都需要从业人员深思熟虑,将健康公平融入到设计方法中。我们提供了一系列使用不同方法纳入公平考虑因素的案例研究,以举例说明如何做到这一点,并展示了根据资源、预算、产品成熟度和其他因素的不同,可采用的应用范围。最后,我们呼吁大家在设计数字医疗工具时要共同严格把关,为得不到充分服务的人群提供公平的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to design equitable digital health tools: A narrative review of design tactics, case studies, and opportunities.

With a renewed focus on health equity in the United States driven by national crises and legislation to improve digital healthcare innovation, there is a need for the designers of digital health tools to take deliberate steps to design for equity in their work. A concrete toolkit of methods to design for health equity is needed to support digital health practitioners in this aim. This narrative review summarizes several health equity frameworks to help digital health practitioners conceptualize the equity dimensions of importance for their work, and then provides design approaches that accommodate an equity focus. Specifically, the Double Diamond Model, the IDEAS framework and toolkit, and community collaboration techniques such as participatory design are explored as mechanisms for practitioners to solicit input from members of underserved groups and better design digital health tools that serve their needs. Each of these design methods requires a deliberate effort by practitioners to infuse health equity into the approach. A series of case studies that use different methods to build in equity considerations are offered to provide examples of how this can be accomplished and demonstrate the range of applications available depending on resources, budget, product maturity, and other factors. We conclude with a call for shared rigor around designing digital health tools that deliver equitable outcomes for members of underserved populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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