The Limitations of User-and Human-Centered Design in an eHealth Context and How to Move Beyond Them

Lex van Velsen, Geke Ludden, Christiane Grünloh

Journal of Medical Internet Research · 2022 · 129 citations · 71 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Human-centered design (HCD) is widely regarded as the best approach for creating eHealth innovations that align with users’ needs and context, yet critical reflections on its application in eHealth are lacking. The authors aim to critically examine HCD practices in eHealth by presenting nine limitations and urging design teams to thoughtfully involve users and stakeholders, while proposing three directions—value‑sensitive design, citizen science, and more‑than‑human design—to advance the field. They analyze HCD in eHealth by outlining nine limitations and discussing how a more critical perspective can move the field forward through value‑sensitive design, citizen science, and more‑than‑human design. The study identifies limitations ranging from limited reach and bias to narrow contextual focus, and suggests that value‑sensitive design, citizen science, and more‑than‑human design can broaden perspectives, care for people and the environment, and foster inclusive, fair, and impactful eHealth innovations.

Abstract

Human-centered design (HCD) is widely regarded as the best design approach for creating eHealth innovations that align with end users’ needs, wishes, and context and has the potential to impact health care. However, critical reflections on applying HCD within the context of eHealth are lacking. Applying a critical eye to the use of HCD approaches within eHealth, we present and discuss 9 limitations that the current practices of HCD in eHealth innovation often carry. The limitations identified range from limited reach and bias to narrow contextual and temporal focus. Design teams should carefully consider if, how, and when they should involve end users and other stakeholders in the design process and how they can combine their insights with existing knowledge and design skills. Finally, we discuss how a more critical perspective on using HCD in eHealth innovation can move the field forward and offer 3 directions of inspiration to improve our design practices: value-sensitive design, citizen science, and more-than-human design. Although value-sensitive design approaches offer a solution to some of the biased or limited views of traditional HCD approaches, combining a citizen science approach with design inspiration and imagining new futures could widen our view on eHealth innovation. Finally, a more-than-human design approach will allow eHealth solutions to care for both people and the environment. These directions can be seen as starting points that invite and support the field of eHealth innovation to do better and to try and develop more inclusive, fair, and valuable eHealth innovations that will have an impact on health and care.

References

71