CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

MyStrengths, a strengths-focused mobile health tool: participatory design and development

Open access
Jessen, Stian, Mirkovic, Jelena, Nes, Lise Solberg·2020·JMIR Formative Research
DOI 10.2196/18049PMC PMC7414410

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: People living with chronic illnesses are an increasingly large group. Research indicates that care and self-management should not only focus on the illness and problem-oriented aspects of these individuals’ lives but also support them in recognizing and leveraging their personal strengths in daily life. Objective: This paper presents the design and developmental process of MyStrengths, a mobile health (mHealth) app designed to help its users (people with chronic conditions) both find and make use of their personal strengths in their daily lives. Through 4 consecutive phases, this paper presents participant- and researcher-driven activities, discussions regarding design, and development of both the MyStrengths app and its content. Methods: During the 4 phases, we used a range of methods and activities, including (1) an idea-generating workshop aimed at creating ideas for strengths-supporting features with different stakeholders, including patients, caregivers, relatives, and designers (N=35); (2) research seminars with an international group of experts (N=6), in which the concept, theoretical background, and design ideas for the app were discussed; (3) a series of co-design workshops with people in the user group (N=22) aiming to create ideas for how to, in an engaging manner, design the app; and (4) in 4 developmental iterations, the app was evaluated by people in the user group (N=13). Content and strengths exercises were worked on and honed by the research team, the expert groups, and our internal editorial team during the entire developmental process. Results: The first phase found a wide range of stakeholder requirements to, and ideas for, strengths-focused mHealth apps. From reviewing literature during the second phase, we found a dearth of research on personal strengths with respect to people living with chronic illnesses. Activities during the third phase creatively provided numerous ideas and suggestions for engaging and gameful ways to develop and design the MyStrengths app. The final phase saw the output from all the earlier phases come together. Through multiple increasingly complete iterations of user evaluations testing and developing, the final prototype of the MyStrengths app was created. Conclusions: Although research supports the use of strengths-focused mHealth tools to support people living with chronic illnesses, there is little guidance as to how these tools and their content should be designed. Through all activities, we found great support among participating users for strengths-focused apps, and we can consider such apps to be both appropriate and valuable. This paper illustrates how combining a range of user-, researcher-, literature-, and designer-based methods can contribute to creating mHealth tools to support people with chronic illnesses to find and use more of their own personal strengths.

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 · 10.2196/18049

Cites

103 of 103 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

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

2 of the 105 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [14]Niemiec R Character Strengths Interventions: A Field Guide for Practitioners. First Edition 2017 Boston, UK Hogrefe Publishing
  2. [41]Shaw A Paul D Billingsley W Kwan P Wilson R Gamification in E-mental Health: Development of a Digital Intervention Addressing Severe Mental Illness and Metabolic Syndrome 8th International Conference on Internet Technologies & Society 2017 ITS'17 December 11-13, 2017 Sydney, Australia 83 90
  3. [55]Kensing F Greenbaum J Simonsen J Robertson T Heritage: having a say Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design 2013 New York, USA Routledge 21 36
  4. [57]Brandt E Binder T Sanders EB Tools and techniques Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design 2006 New York, USA Routledge 145 81
  5. [58]Vidal RV The Future Workshop: Democratic Problem Solving IMM, DTU, Image Analysis and Computer Graphics 2005 2020-07-07 http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/pubdb/pubs/4095-full.html
  6. [95]Rath T StrengthsFinder 2.0 2007 Omaha Gallup Press
  7. [98]Gemert-pijnen LV Kelders S Jong N Oinas-kukkonen H Gemert-pijnen Lv Kelders S Kip H Sanderman R Persuasive health tehnologies EHealth Research, Theory and Development: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach 2018 London & New York Routledge 228 46

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jessen, S., Mirkovic, J., & Nes, L. S.
Affiliations
Oslo University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
Jessen, Stian
ORCID
Venue
JMIR Formative Research
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2020-07-24
Volume
4
Issue
7
Pages
e18049
ISSN
2561-326X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/18049
PMC
PMC7414410
OpenAlex
W3035258712
Cited by
14
References
105
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5
FWCI
2.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Norges Forskningsråd (rcn-foriss-248026)
  • Akershus Universitetssykehus
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 › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
strengths-based approach, chronic disease, participatory design, co-design workshops, gameful design, self-management, chronic care, user evaluation, stakeholder needs, app development, patient engagement, caregivers, relatives, prototype development, expert seminar, user-centered design

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