Is participatory design associated with the effectiveness of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion? : a meta-analysis

Background: Serious digital games can be effective at changing healthy lifestyles, but large differences in their effectiveness exist. The extent of user involvement in game design may contribute to game effectiveness by creating a better fit with user preferences. Participatory design (PD), which represents active user involvement as informant (ie, users are asked for input and feedback) or codesigner (ie, users as equal partners in the design) early on and throughout the game development, may be associated with higher game effectiveness, as opposed to no user involvement or limited user involvement. Objective: This paper reports the results of a meta-analysis examining the moderating role of PD in the effectiveness of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion. Methods: Four databases were searched for peer-reviewed papers in English that were published or in press before October 2014, using a (group-) randomized controlled trial design. Effectiveness data were derived from another meta-analysis assessing the role of behavior change techniques and game features in serious game effectiveness. Results: A total of 58 games evaluated in 61 studies were included. As previously reported, serious digital games had positive effects on healthy lifestyles and their determinants. Unexpectedly, PD (g=0.075, 95% CI 0.017 to 0.133) throughout game development was related to lower game effectiveness on behavior (Q=6.74, P<.05) than when users were only involved as testers (g=0.520, 95% CI 0.150 to 0.890, P<.01). Games developed with PD (g=0.171, 95% CI 0.061 to 0.281, P<.01) were also related to lower game effectiveness on self-efficacy (Q=7.83, P<.05) than when users were not involved in game design (g=0.384, 95% CI 0.283 to 0.485, P<.001). Some differences were noted depending on age group, publication year of the study, and on the specific role in PD (ie, informant or codesigner), and depending on the game design element. Games developed with PD were more effective in changing behavioral determinants when they included users in design elements on game dynamics (beta=.215, 95% CI .075 to .356, P<.01) and, more specifically, as an informant (beta=.235, 95% CI .079 to .329, P<.01). Involving users as informants in PD to create game levels was also related to higher game effectiveness (Q=7.02, P<.01). Codesign was related to higher effectiveness when used to create the game challenge (Q=11.23, P<.01), but to lower game effectiveness when used to create characters (Q=4.36, P<.05) and the game world (Q=3.99, P<.05). Conclusions: The findings do not support higher effectiveness of games developed with PD. However, significant differences existed among PD games. More support was found for informant roles than for codesign roles. When PD was applied to game dynamics, levels, and game challenge, this was associated with higher effectiveness than when it was applied to game aesthetics. Since user involvement may have an important influence on reach, adoption, and implementation of the intervention, further research and design efforts are needed to enhance effectiveness of serious games developed with PD

Improving the Detection, Assessment, Management and Prevention of Delirium in Hospices (the DAMPen-D study): protocol for a co-design and feasibility study of a flexible and scalable implementation strategy to deliver guideline-adherent delirium care

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is a complex condition in which altered mental state and cognition causes severe distress and poor clinical outcomes for patients and families, anxiety and stress for the health professionals and support staff providing care, and higher care costs. Hospice patients are at high risk of developing delirium, but there is significant variation in care delivery. The primary objective of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility of an implementation strategy (designed to help deliver good practice delirium guidelines), participant recruitment and data collection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Three work packages in three hospices in the UK with public involvement in codesign, study management and stakeholder groups: (1) experience-based codesign to adapt an existing theoretically-informed implementation strategy (Creating Learning Environments for Compassionate Care (CLECC)) to implement delirium guidelines in hospices; (2) feasibility study to explore ability to collect demographic, diagnostic and delirium management data from clinical records (n=300), explanatory process data (number of staff engaged in CLECC activities and reasons for non-engagement) and cost data (staff and volunteer hours and pay-grades engaged in implementation activities) and (3) realist process evaluation to assess the acceptability and flexibility of the implementation strategy (preimplementation and postimplementation surveys with hospice staff and management, n=30 at each time point; interviews with hospice staff and management, n=15). Descriptive statistics, rapid thematic analysis and a realist logic of analysis will be used be used to analyse quantitative and qualitative data, as appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval obtained: Hull York Medical School Ethics Committee (Ref 21/23), Health Research Authority Research Ethics Committee Wales REC7 (Ref 21/WA/0180) and Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (Ref 21/CAG/0071). Written informed consent will be obtained from interview participants. A results paper will be submitted to an open access peer-reviewed journal and a lay summary shared with study site staff and stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN55416525

Lived experience codesign of self-harm interventions: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to map existing literature describing how people with lived experience of self-harm have engaged in codesigning self-harm interventions, understand barriers and facilitators to this engagement, and how the meaningfulness of codesign has been evaluated. DESIGN: Scoping review by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. A protocol was published online (http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P52UD). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, ClinicalTrials.gov and relevant websites were searched on 24 December 2022 (repeated 4 November 2023). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies where individuals with lived experience of self-harm (first-hand or caregiver) have codesigned self-harm interventions. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Results were screened at title and abstract level, then full-text level by two researchers independently. Prespecified data were extracted, charted and sorted into themes. RESULTS: We included 22 codesigned interventions across mobile health, educational settings, prisons and emergency departments. Involvement varied from designing content to multistage involvement in planning, delivery and dissemination. Included papers described the contribution of 159 female, 39 male and 21 transgender or gender diverse codesigners. Few studies included contributors from a minoritised ethnic or LGBTQIA+ group. Six studies evaluated how meaningfully people with lived experience were engaged in codesign: by documenting the impact of contributions on intervention design or through postdesign reflections. Barriers included difficulties recruiting inclusively, making time for meaningful engagement in stretched services and safeguarding concerns for codesigners. Explicit processes for ensuring safety and well-being, flexible schedules, and adequate funding facilitated codesign. CONCLUSIONS: To realise the potential of codesign to improve self-harm interventions, people with lived experience must be representative of those who use services. This requires processes that reassure potential contributors and referrers that codesigners will be safeguarded, remunerated, and their contributions used and valued

Comparative Design-Based Research: How Afterschool Programs Impact Learners' Engagement with a Video Game Codesign

Community-based afterschool programs are valuable spaces for researchers to codesign technologies with direct relevance to local communities. However, afterschool programs differ in resources available, culture, and student demographics in ways that may impact the efficacy of the codesign process and outcome. We ran a series of multi-week educational game codesign workshops across five programs over twenty weeks and found notable differences, despite deploying the same protocol. Our findings characterize three types of programs: Safe Havens, Recreation Centers, and Homework Helpers. We note major differences in students' patterns of participation directly influenced by each program's culture and expectations for equitable partnerships and introduce Comparative Design-Based Research (cDBR) as a beneficial lens for codesign

Codesigning health and other public services with vulnerable and disadvantaged populations: Insights from an international collaboration

Background Codesign has the potential to transform health and other public services. To avoid unintentionally reinforcing existing inequities, better understanding is needed of how to facilitate involvement of vulnerable populations in acceptable, ethical and effective codesign. Objective To explore citizens’ involvement in codesigning public services for vulnerable groups, identify challenges and suggest improvements. Design A modified case study approach. Pattern matching was used to compare reported challenges with a priori theoretical propositions. Setting and participants A two‐day international symposium involved 28 practitioners, academics and service users from seven countries to reflect on challenges and to codesign improved processes for involving vulnerable populations. Intervention studied Eight case studies working with vulnerable and disadvantaged populations in three countries. Results We identified five shared challenges to meaningful, sustained participation of vulnerable populations: engagement; power differentials; health concerns; funding; and other economic/social circumstances. In response, a focus on relationships and flexibility is essential. We encourage codesign projects to enact a set of principles or heuristics rather than following pre‐specified steps. We identify a set of principles and tactics, relating to challenges outlined in our case studies, which may help in codesigning public services with vulnerable populations. Discussion and conclusions Codesign facilitators must consider how meaningful engagement will be achieved and how power differentials will be managed when working with services for vulnerable populations. The need for flexibility and responsiveness to service user needs may challenge expectations about timelines and outcomes. User‐centred evaluations of codesigned public services are needed

Using stakeholders' experiences to redesign health services for persons living with heart failure: A case study protocol in a Swedish cardiac care setting

Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Introduction: Clinical guidelines promote recognising persons with heart failure (referred to as PWHF) as coproducers of their own care. Coproduction of healthcare—involving PWHF, families and professionals in care processes—aims to promote the best possible health. Still, it is unclear how to coproduce heart failure (HF) care. This study explores whether and how Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD) involving PWHF, family members and professionals can be undertaken online, in a Swedish cardiac care setting, to codesign improved experiences of HF care. Methods and analysis: In EBCD, stakeholders’ experiences are solicited to redesign healthcare services. First, we will undertake a thematic analysis of field notes from consultations and filmed/audio-recorded interviews with PWHF (n=10–12). This analysis will identify ‘touchpoints’ (emotionally positive/negative events that shape overall service experiences), edited into a ‘trigger film’. Next, a thematic analysis of family members’ (n=10– 12) and professionals’ (n=10–12) interviews will identify key themes mirroring their experiences. Separate feedback events with each stakeholder group will confirm identified touchpoints and key themes and identify areas for HF care improvement. At a joint event, prompted by the ‘trigger film’, stakeholders will agree on one area for HF care improvement. A team including PWHF, family members and professionals, led by an improvement adviser, will then plan, design, implement and evaluate an improvement activity addressing the identified problem area. A deductive thematic analysis of field notes, project documentation and stakeholder focus group interviews, underpinned by MUSIQ, will identify how organisational conditions influence the process. Quantitative measurements, describing the results of the improvement activity, will be integrated with qualitative data to strengthen the case. To reduce resource intensity, we will use online tools during the process. Ethics and dissemination: The Swedish Ethical Review Authority approved the study in May 2021. The results will be disseminated through seminars, conference presentations and publications.publishedVersio