Cited by 79Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchDigital Mental Health Interventions

User-Centered Design of a Mobile Health Intervention to Enhance Exacerbation-Related Self-Management in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (Copilot): Mixed Methods Study

Open access
Korpershoek, Yvonne J G, Hermsen, Sander, Schoonhoven, Lisette, Schuurmans, Marieke J, Trappenburg, Jaap C A·2020·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Adequate self-management skills are of great importance for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to reduce the impact of COPD exacerbations. Using mobile health (mHealth) to support exacerbation-related self-management could be promising in engaging patients in their own health and changing health behaviors. However, there is limited knowledge on how to design mHealth interventions that are effective, meet the needs of end users, and are perceived as useful. By following an iterative user-centered design (UCD) process, an evidence-driven and usable mHealth intervention was developed to enhance exacerbation-related self-management in patients with COPD. Objective: This study aimed to describe in detail the full UCD and development process of an evidence-driven and usable mHealth intervention to enhance exacerbation-related self-management in patients with COPD. Methods: The UCD process consisted of four iterative phases: (1) background analysis and design conceptualization, (2) alpha usability testing, (3) iterative software development, and (4) field usability testing. Patients with COPD, health care providers, COPD experts, designers, software developers, and a behavioral scientist were involved throughout the design and development process. The intervention was developed using the behavior change wheel (BCW), a theoretically based approach for designing behavior change interventions, and logic modeling was used to map out the potential working mechanism of the intervention. Furthermore, the principles of design thinking were used for the creative design of the intervention. Qualitative and quantitative research methods were used throughout the design and development process. Results: The background analysis and design conceptualization phase resulted in final guiding principles for the intervention, a logic model to underpin the working mechanism of the intervention, and design requirements. Usability requirements were obtained from the usability testing phases. The iterative software development resulted in an evidence-driven and usable mHealth intervention—Copilot, a mobile app consisting of a symptom-monitoring module, and a personalized COPD action plan. Conclusions: By following a UCD process, an mHealth intervention was developed that meets the needs and preferences of patients with COPD, is likely to be used by patients with COPD, and has a high potential to be effective in reducing exacerbation impact. This extensive report of the intervention development process contributes to more transparency in the development of complex interventions in health care and can be used by researchers and designers as guidance for the development of future mHealth interventions.

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 · 10.2196/15449

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • Researchers concluded that perspectives from all important stakeholders should be accounted for in a business model.

    “First, researchers concluded that perspectives from all important stakeholders should be accounted for in a business model.”

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: 4

  1. [36]Strauss AL Corbin J Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Third Edition 2007 Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications
  2. [39]Krueger RA Casey MA Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Fourth Edition 2008 Los Angeles Sage
  3. [45]Wiklund M Kendler JA Strochlic A Usability Testing of Medical Devices. Second Edition 2011 Boca Raton, FL CRC press
  4. [53]Science Direct 2019-05-23 System Usability Scale 2019 https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/system-usability-scale

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Korpershoek, Y. J. G., Hermsen, S., Schoonhoven, L., Schuurmans, M. J., & Trappenburg, J. C. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Applied Sciences Utrecht (NL)
  • OnePlanet Research Center (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Korpershoek, Yvonne J G
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2020-06-15
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
e15449
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3021947321
Cited by
78
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4
FWCI
10.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, COPD exacerbations, self-management, mobile health, user-centered design, Behaviour Change Wheel, logic model, design thinking, usability testing, symptom monitoring, personalized action plan, complex interventions
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Humans, Telemedicine, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Mobile Applications

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