Designathons in health research: a global systematic review
Introduction A designathon is a three-stage participatory activity informed by design thinking. There is a growing literature on designathons in health. This study synthesised designathons’ effectiveness and implementation-related factors to address health challenges.Methods We searched Cochrane Lib...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2024-03-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Global Health |
| Online Access: | https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/3/e013961.full |
| _version_ | 1797269485439156224 |
|---|---|
| author | Chunyan Li Ucheoma Nwaozuru Jason J Ong Joseph D Tucker Tiarney Ritchwood Elizabeth Chen Jamie L Conklin Abdulhammed Opeyemi Babatunde Warittha Tieosapjaroen Arturo M Ongkeko Nina T Castillo Carandang |
| author_facet | Chunyan Li Ucheoma Nwaozuru Jason J Ong Joseph D Tucker Tiarney Ritchwood Elizabeth Chen Jamie L Conklin Abdulhammed Opeyemi Babatunde Warittha Tieosapjaroen Arturo M Ongkeko Nina T Castillo Carandang |
| author_sort | Chunyan Li |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction A designathon is a three-stage participatory activity informed by design thinking. There is a growing literature on designathons in health. This study synthesised designathons’ effectiveness and implementation-related factors to address health challenges.Methods We searched Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry for articles containing primary data on designathons for health from their dates of inception to 29 November 2022. We retrieved additional studies from citation searching and a complementary open call. We synthesised data on designathons’ effectiveness (ie, engagement, outputs and implementation), required resources and implementation-related factors (ie, resources, facilitators, barriers, strengths and limitations). We assessed the risk of bias using a checklist adapted from Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools.Results In total, 4973 citations were identified, and 42 studies were included. In total, 26 studies (62%) were from high-income countries. The median number of total participants was 49, divided into a median of 8 teams. The duration of the intensive collaboration phase ranged from 3 hours to 7 days. Common evaluation criteria were feasibility, innovation and impact. Idea and prototype outputs included mobile phone applications, educational programmes and medical devices. Interventions developed from a designathon was estimated to be highly cost-effective. The most common facilitators were interdisciplinary participants and high-quality mentorship. The most common barriers were suboptimal execution of the events, difficulties in balancing interdisciplinary participants across teams and limited support for participants along the process. There were limited data on required resources and further implementation of solutions after designathons.Conclusion Given designathons’ adaptability in terms of budget, mode of delivery, type of output and involvement of diverse participants, including end users, designathons can be implemented in a wide range of contexts to address various health issues.PROSPERO registration number CRD42023389685. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-25T01:49:07Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ccdb8b11f7d84da3b5fc4bd9acbbe925 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2059-7908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-25T01:49:07Z |
| publishDate | 2024-03-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Global Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-ccdb8b11f7d84da3b5fc4bd9acbbe9252024-03-07T19:15:09ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Global Health2059-79082024-03-019310.1136/bmjgh-2023-013961Designathons in health research: a global systematic reviewChunyan Li0Ucheoma Nwaozuru1Jason J Ong2Joseph D Tucker3Tiarney Ritchwood4Elizabeth Chen5Jamie L Conklin6Abdulhammed Opeyemi Babatunde7Warittha Tieosapjaroen8Arturo M Ongkeko9Nina T Castillo Carandang101 Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, ChinaDepartment of Behavioral Science and Health Education, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, Missouri, USACentral Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaClinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK6 Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA9 Health Behavior Department, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC-CH, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USAHealth Science Library, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA1College Of Medicine University Of Ibadan, NigeriaMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Carlton, Victoria, AustraliaNational Institutes of Health, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, The PhilippinesFoundation for the Advancement of Clinical Epidemiology Inc, Manila, The PhilippinesIntroduction A designathon is a three-stage participatory activity informed by design thinking. There is a growing literature on designathons in health. This study synthesised designathons’ effectiveness and implementation-related factors to address health challenges.Methods We searched Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry for articles containing primary data on designathons for health from their dates of inception to 29 November 2022. We retrieved additional studies from citation searching and a complementary open call. We synthesised data on designathons’ effectiveness (ie, engagement, outputs and implementation), required resources and implementation-related factors (ie, resources, facilitators, barriers, strengths and limitations). We assessed the risk of bias using a checklist adapted from Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools.Results In total, 4973 citations were identified, and 42 studies were included. In total, 26 studies (62%) were from high-income countries. The median number of total participants was 49, divided into a median of 8 teams. The duration of the intensive collaboration phase ranged from 3 hours to 7 days. Common evaluation criteria were feasibility, innovation and impact. Idea and prototype outputs included mobile phone applications, educational programmes and medical devices. Interventions developed from a designathon was estimated to be highly cost-effective. The most common facilitators were interdisciplinary participants and high-quality mentorship. The most common barriers were suboptimal execution of the events, difficulties in balancing interdisciplinary participants across teams and limited support for participants along the process. There were limited data on required resources and further implementation of solutions after designathons.Conclusion Given designathons’ adaptability in terms of budget, mode of delivery, type of output and involvement of diverse participants, including end users, designathons can be implemented in a wide range of contexts to address various health issues.PROSPERO registration number CRD42023389685.https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/3/e013961.full |
| spellingShingle | Chunyan Li Ucheoma Nwaozuru Jason J Ong Joseph D Tucker Tiarney Ritchwood Elizabeth Chen Jamie L Conklin Abdulhammed Opeyemi Babatunde Warittha Tieosapjaroen Arturo M Ongkeko Nina T Castillo Carandang Designathons in health research: a global systematic review BMJ Global Health |
| title | Designathons in health research: a global systematic review |
| title_full | Designathons in health research: a global systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Designathons in health research: a global systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Designathons in health research: a global systematic review |
| title_short | Designathons in health research: a global systematic review |
| title_sort | designathons in health research a global systematic review |
| url | https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/3/e013961.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chunyanli designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT ucheomanwaozuru designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT jasonjong designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT josephdtucker designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT tiarneyritchwood designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT elizabethchen designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT jamielconklin designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT abdulhammedopeyemibabatunde designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT waritthatieosapjaroen designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT arturomongkeko designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview AT ninatcastillocarandang designathonsinhealthresearchaglobalsystematicreview |