Cited by 23Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsICT in Developing Communities

Designing a Mobile App to Enhance Parenting Skills of Latinx Parents: A Community-Based Participatory Approach

Open access
Doty, Jennifer L, Brady, Sonya S, Monardez Popelka, Javiera, Rietveld, Laura, Garcia-Huidobro, Diego, Doty, Matthew J, Linares, Roxana, Svetaz, Maria Veronica +1 more·2020·JMIR Formative Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Latinx families are among the highest users of smartphones, yet few health-focused Web programs have been developed for this audience. Parent-based smartphone apps designed for Latinx families may help increase access to evidence-informed parenting programming and ultimately reduce health disparities among children and adolescents. To maximize uptake of such apps, the Center for eHealth Research and Disease Management (CeHRes) Roadmap for electronic health (eHealth) development recommends 5 phases of development: (1) contextual inquiry, (2) value specification, (3) design, (4) operationalization, and (5) evaluation. Objective: Guided by the CeHRes Roadmap, our objective was to apply a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to mobile app development. We present a formative evaluation to inform the design of an eHealth mobile app for Latinx parents of adolescents based on a face-to-face parenting program, Padres Informados/Jovenes Preparados (PIJP). Methods: Community participants in the process included Latinx parents and stakeholders. We conducted a parent survey (N=115) and interviews (N=20) to understand the context and obtain feedback on a mockup and prototype of the app, facilitator workshops to streamline content, and stakeholder interviews (N=4) to discuss values and app requirements. Results: We report results from the first 3 phases of the CeHRes Roadmap. In the survey, 96.5% (111/115) of parents reported they had access to a cell phone, 85.6% (89/104) reported they would use a parenting app in the next month if they had access, and 80.2% (89/111) reported intentions to use a stress reduction app. Parents reported that setting goals about parenting and tracking those goals were important potential features of an app. In logistic regression analyses, technology attitudes and barriers were not related to parent’s intentions to use a parenting mobile app (95% CI 0.51-1.17 and 95% CI 0.28-2.12, respectively). Qualitative interviews confirmed Latinx parents’ technology engagement and desire for education and child development information online. Stakeholder interviews identified 3 community values: familism, the promotion of adolescent health, and delivery of economic value. Community stakeholders participated in defining the mobile app requirements. On the basis of community and parent input, the mobile app prototype was designed with 3 sections: (1) 8 modules of video-based parenting skills instruction with content from the face-to-face PIJP program, (2) breath rate information from a wearable device to support awareness of stress levels that could affect parenting, and (3) goal setting and tracking capacities. Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight the utility of an iterative, participatory design process. The CBPR approach and community collaboration enhanced the CeHRes Roadmap by promoting power sharing, facilitating recruitment, and building trust among community members. Experiences applying community research to the initial 3 phases of the CeHRes Roadmap in a Latinx community are discussed, along with plans for the 2 final phases.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/12618

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ideally, multiple sources of data should be combined, such as scientific literature and qualitative data collected from multiple types of stakeholders.

    “Ideally, multiple sources of data should be combined, such as scientific literature and qualitative data collected from multiple types of stakeholders”
  • Authors stated that requirements should be elicited in a systematic way.

    “First of all, authors stated that requirements should be elicited in a systematic way.”
  • Because major changes might be made to prototypes in an iterative development process, changes to the requirements might also be necessary to ensure that they remain in line with the prototype of the eHealth technology.

    “Third, because major changes might be made to prototypes in an iterative development process, changes to the requirements might also be necessary to ensure that they remain in line with the prototype of the eHealth technology.”
  • When shaping a multi-method or mixed methods development process, an iterative and flexible development approach is key.

    “the lessons learned illustrated that when shaping a multi-method or mixed methods development process, an iterative and flexible development approach is key [33,54,55,64,113,115].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [10]Israel B Eng E Schulz AJ Parker EA Satcher D Methods in Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. Second Edition 2013 San Francisco Jossey-bass
  2. [23]Hurtado GA Svetaz MV Allen ML Parenting outcomes of a multisite intervention for Latino families Proceedings of the National Conference on Family Relations 2017 NCFR'17 November 15-18, 2017 Orlando, FL
  3. [36]Moraveji N Santoro E Smith E Kane A Crum A Susi M Semantic Scholar 2017 2019-11-20 Using a Wearable Health Tracker to Improve Health and Wellbeing Under Stress https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9c31/8aca434ea8147f4aa01d69f19c6cf9c9e251.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doty, J. L., Brady, S. S., Monardez Popelka, J., Rietveld, L., Garcia-Huidobro, D., Doty, M. J., Linares, R., Svetaz, M. V., & Allen, M. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Best Buy (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Doty, Jennifer L
Venue
JMIR Formative Research
Published
2020-01-24
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
e12618
ISSN
2561-326X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2982141328
Cited by
23
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (T32HP22239)
  • University of Minnesota (T32HP22239)
  • Family Process Institute
  • Health Resources and Services Administration (T32HP22239)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
Keywords
Latinx parents, adolescent parenting, community-based participatory research, formative assessment, technology acceptance, familism, adolescent health, parenting skills, goal tracking, stress reduction, health disparities, stakeholder engagement, smartphone use, child development education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review