Improving the Engagement of Underrepresented People in Health Research Through Equity-Centered Design Thinking: Qualitative Study and Process Evaluation for the Development of the Grounding Health Research in Design Toolkit

Abstract

Background Health inequalities are rooted in historically unjust differences in economic opportunities, environment, access to health care services, and other social determinants. Owing to these health inequalities, the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected underserved populations, notably people of color, incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals, and those unable to physically distance themselves from others. However, people most strongly impacted by health disparities, and the pandemic, are not frequently engaged in research, either as researchers or as participants, resulting in slow progress toward improving health equity. Establishing ways to foster the engagement of historically excluded people is crucial to improving health equity through patient-centered health research. Objective This study aimed to assess the use of equity-centered design thinking (EDT) for engaging community members in research prioritization related to COVID-19. The co-design methods and subsequent production of a toolkit that can be used for engagement were assessed through process evaluation and qualitative methods. Methods Process evaluation and qualitative inquiry, using reflexive thematic analysis, were undertaken to examine the use of EDT. Patient community members and stakeholders remotely partnered with design and health researchers in a year-long digital process to cocreate capacity-building tools for setting agenda for research regarding the impact of COVID-19 on health outcomes. Through a series of 3 workshops, 5 community partners engaged in EDT activities to identify critical challenges for the health and well-being of their communities. The subsequent tools were tested with 10 health researchers who provided critical input over the course of 2 workshops. Interviews with co-designers, project materials, and feedback sessions were used in the process evaluation and finalization of an equity-centered toolkit for community engagement in research. Data from the co-design process, meetings, workshops, and interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify salient themes. Results Process evaluation illustrated how the EDT co-design process offered an approach to engage patient partners and community stakeholders in health-related research around COVID-19. The participants expressed satisfaction with design thinking approaches, including creative activities and iterative co-design, as a means of working together. Thematic analysis identified 3 key themes: the value of authentic partnerships, building trust and empathy through design, and fostering candid dialogue around health and social issues impacting historically underrepresented and underinvested communities. Conclusions The project addressed the need to test EDT strategies for fostering inclusive community engagement in health research agenda setting and provided an alternative to traditional top-down models. Despite the increasing use of human-centered design in health, few projects explicitly include equity in design thinking approaches. The use of methods and tools to intentionally engage underrepresented stakeholders in the process of research agenda setting and equitably sharing power between researchers and community members may improve health research, ultimately improving health equity.

The opportunities and challenges to co-designing policy options for tree health with policy makers, researchers and land managers

“…But with innovation comes a complex set of trade-offs such as balancing time, resources, and the experimental space needed to find techniques that are inclusive, those which are innovative yet appropriate, and to build the learning feedback loops required to discuss, design, prototype and trial policy options. Digital engagement within co-design may be an innovative route to broadening engagement across types of individuals and spatial locations, and may work to include harder to reach audiences (see for example, Bazzano et al, 2023;Mora et al, 2022). However, the types of interaction enabled by digital engagement may be suited to specific steps in the co-design process, e.g.…”

Gender-aware Parkinson’s care: a design-based study of patient perspectives on gender norms and gender-sensitive care

“…To our knowledge, there are still few design-based health research studies that directly address gender inequities that impact health and illness experiences. 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 While human-centred design methodologies, such as the ECD approach used in this study, are often perceived as a single standardised method, their application, in fact, entails a wide array of qualitative, quantitative and design methods or techniques that can and should be used selectively, dependent on the specific research context. 50 ECD practitioners in health research should carefully select the participatory methods they deploy, with sensitivity towards capturing the unique insights and capabilities of each participant in the design process and stay attuned to the power dynamics and agency of varying stakeholders during co-design sessions.…”

Exploring the Landscape of Eco-Mapping in Health Services Research: A Comprehensive Review

“…Given the increasing attention on social connections as a public health priority [9], eco-maps could be leveraged through research to capture gaps and opportunities in health services and supportive care networks [17]. Mounting evidence of eco-mapping used to analyze support networks demonstrates its practicality [24,25]; however, a synthesis of what is known about eco-mapping in the extant health services literature is yet to be done. A scoping review is warranted to understand for what purpose and how eco-mapping has been used broadly in health services research.…”