Co-design, implementation and evaluation

Centre for Health Technology
Intergenerational codesign hero image
“Technologies can fail because of poor design, which stems from a lack of understanding of the actual requirements of the expected end-users” ( Dr Hannah Bradwell , the New Statesman, 8 December 2023 – 11 January, 2024).
Building on our earlier work in the European Regional Development funded E-Health Productivity & Innovation in Cornwall (EPIC) projects, co-design has become a cornerstone of the Centre for Health Technology’s work. We seek to accelerate digital transformations by empowering end users, developers, patients, and health and care staff by actively involving them in the design of technologies that work and meet their needs and expectations – these can respond to issues of quality, usability, ergonomics, or finance, to name a few co-design considerations. Our researchers have also explored staff attitudes towards digital innovation in a range of settings, from social care and general practice to outpatient, inpatient and specialist rehabilitation centres. We do so with a multi-disciplinary team of researchers including creatives, technologists and health researchers collaborating across three faculties and multiple external partnerships.

Our projects

EPIC stock image

EPIC

Elderly person in wheelchair exercising using a virtual reality (VR) headset

Generating Older Active Lives Digitally (GOALD)

Senior couple looking at an iPad.

Intergenerational Codesign of Novel technologies In Coastal communities (ICONIC)

Image of a woman using the Joy App on a desktop computer.

The Joy App

Doctor with stethoscope and white icon medical on hospital background, medical technology network concept.

NHS New Hospital Programme (NHP)

Recent publications

2023

Bradwell HL, Cooper L, Edwards KJ, Baxter R, Tomaz SA, Ritchie J, Gaudl S, Veliz-Reyes A, Ryde GC, Križaj T, Warren A, Chatterjee A, Willis K, Haynes R, Hennessy CH, Whittaker AC, Asthana S, Jones RB; GOALD project. (2023). Staff perceptions towards virtual reality-motivated treadmill exercise for care home residents: a qualitative feedback study with key stakeholders and follow-up interview with technology developer. BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 23;13(11):e073307. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073307
Bradwell HL, Edwards KJ, Baines R, Page T, Chatterjee A, Jones RB (2023). Facial recognition lock technology for social care settings: A qualitative evaluation of implementation of facial recognition locks at two residential care sites, Frontiers in Digital Health, Vol.5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1066327
Bradwell, H., Cooper, L., Tomaz, S., Baxter, R., Edwards, K., Whittaker A.C., & Jones, R.B. (2023). Implementation of virtual reality motivated physical activity via omnidirectional treadmill in a supported living facility for older adults: A mixed-methods evaluation. CHI '24, May 11–16, 2024, Honolulu, HI, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642281
Chapman R, Zeissler M-L, Meinert E, Mullin S, Whipps S, Whipps J, Hockey K, Hockey P & Carroll CB (2023). Incorporating usability evaluation into iterative development of an online platform to support research participation in Parkinson’s disease: a mixed methods protocol. BMJ Open 13, (12) e078638-e078638. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078638
Frost, J., Hobson-Merrett, C., Gask, L. et al. (2023). Liquidity and uncertainty: digital adaptation of a complex intervention for people with severe mental illness during the COVID-19 lockdown. BMC Digit Health 1, 28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s44247-023-00028-x
Milne-Ives M, Homer SR, Andrade J & Meinert E (2023). Potential associations between behavior change techniques and engagement with mobile health apps: a systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology 14:1227443. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1227443
Morris B, Warren A, Bradwell H & Noonan M (2023). Barriers and facilitators to the adoption and use of assistive technology for adults with an intellectual disability who live in supported accommodation: a mixed methods systematic review protocol. JBI Evidence Synthesis 21(6):1259-1269. https://doi.org/10.11124/jbies-22-00313

2022

Baines R, Bradwell H, Edwards K, Stevens S, Prime S, Tredinnick-Rowe J, Sibley M & Chatterjee A (2022). Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review. Health Expectations 25(4):1232-1245. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13506
Buckingham SA, Anil K, Demain S, Gunn H, Jones RB, Kent B, Logan A, Marsden J, Playford ED & Freeman J (2022). Telerehabilitation for People with Physical Disabilities and Movement Impairment: A Survey of United Kingdom Practitioners. JMIRx Med 3(1):e30516. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2074549
Buckingham SA, Walker T, Morrissey K. (2022). The feasibility and acceptability of digital technology for health and wellbeing in social housing residents in Cornwall: A qualitative scoping study. Digital Health. 2022; 8:20552076221074124. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076221074124
Day JO, Smith S, Noyce AJ, Alty J, Jeffery A, Chapman R, Carroll C. (2022). Challenges of Incorporating Digital Health Technology Outcomes in a Clinical Trial: Experiences from PD STAT. J Parkinsons Dis. 2022;12(5):1605-1609. https://doi.org/10.3233/JPD-223162
Knight, J., Haines, A., Peres, N., Bellali, J. (2022). A Co-Design Solution to Digital Literacy in Health Provision. Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust.
Maramba ID & Chatterjee A (2022). Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study. JMIRx Med 3(1):e31679. https://doi.org/10.2196/31679
Maramba ID. (2022). A Toolkit for the Usability Evaluation of Digital Health Technologies. DOI: 10.14236/ewic/HCI2022.55. https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2022.55

2021

Bailey JV, Bennett KF, Gubijev A, Shawe J, Stephenson J. Participant views and experiences of sexual health research: The Contraception Choices online trial. Digital Health. 2021;7. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076211033424
Baines R, Underwood F, O’Keeffe K, Saunders J & Jones RB (2021). Implementing online patient feedback in a ‘special measures’ acute hospital: A case study using Normalisation Process Theory. Digital Health 7:20552076211005962. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076211005962
Bradwell HL, Aguiar Noury GE, Edwards KJ, Winnington R, Thill S & Jones RB (2021). Design recommendations for socially assistive robots for health and social care based on a large scale analysis of stakeholder positions. Health Policy and Technology 10, (3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2021.100544
Bradwell HL, Edwards K, Shenton D, Winnington R, Thill S & Jones RB (2021). User-Centered Design of Companion Robot Pets Involving Care Home Resident-Robot Interactions and Focus Groups with Residents, Staff, and Family: Qualitative Study. JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies 8 (4). https://doi.org/10.2196/30337
Costa LV, Veloso AI, Sousa L, Loizou M & Arnab S (2021). Older Adults “Jump” into co Desiging a Digital Game. Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNISA, volume 12786). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78108-8_7
Edwards K, Bradwell H, Jones R, Andrade J & Shawe J (2021). How do women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus use mHealth during and after pregnancy? Qualitative exploration of women's views and experiences. Midwifery, 98:102995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2021.102995
Lambert JD, Elliott LR, Taylor AH, Farrand P, Haase AM, Greaves CJ (2021) A novel method for assessing design fidelity in web-based behavioral interventions. Health Psychology Vol.40 Iss.3 10.1037/hea0001046. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001046
Schermuly AC, Petersen A & Anderson A (2021) ‘I’m not an activist!’: digital self-advocacy in online patient communities, Critical Public Health, 31:2, 204-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2020.1841116
Thomas, N., Kay, E., Witton, R. et al. (2021). Comparison of a full arch digital photographic assessment of caries prevalence in 5-year-old children to an established visual assessment method: a cross-sectional study. BDJ Open 7, 32. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-021-00087-0
Zamir S, Allman F, Hennessy CH, Taylor AH & Jones RB (2021). Aesthetically Designing Video-Call Technology with Care Home Residents: A Focus Group Study. Frontiers in Psychology 12:540048. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.540048

2020

Bradwell HL, Winnington R, Thill S & Jones RB (2020). Ethical perceptions towards real-world use of companion robots with older people and people with dementia: survey opinions among younger adults. BMC Geriatrics 20 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01641-5
Wright H, Martin F, Clyne W, Clark CCT, McGillion M, Matouskova G, Turner A. (2020). A Digital Program (Hope) for People Living with Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc 2020;9(12):e24264. https://doi.org/10.2196/24264
 

Hear from those involved

GOALD awareness film – involving users in the design process: filmed at a Plymouth stakeholder event, this video gives an overview of the GOALD project and how we are working with intergenerational groups to co-design digital technologies that aim to improve health and wellbeing for older people.
Why did Kensa Health engage with EPIC? Founder and Head of Digital at Kensa Health, Caitlin Gould talks about why they chose to engage with EPIC – gaining access to academic and research support alongside funding.

The GOALD toolkit – the impact of co-design

Design considerations for development of technologies to support physical and mental activity for older adults.

Our co-design toolkit for developers

Developed from research conducted as part of the Generating Older Active Lives Digitally (GOALD) project at the University of Plymouth and University of Stirling, we have created a toolkit for technology developers to support with the creation of digital products for older adults with a focus on promoting physical activity. It is made up of three sections:
  1. General recommendations for all technologies designed for older adults.
  2. Virtual Reality (VR) sub section for those working with immersive technologies.
  3. Physical activity platforms sub section (i.e. websites, apps, games).
Icon of a toolkit

Our researchers