Investigating the Best Practices for Engagement in Remote Participatory Design: Mixed Methods Analysis of 4 Remote Studies With Family Caregivers

Abstract

Background: Digital health interventions are a promising method for delivering timely support to underresourced family caregivers. The uptake of digital health interventions among caregivers may be improved by engaging caregivers in participatory design (PD). In recent years, there has been a shift toward conducting PD remotely, which may enable participation by previously hard-to-reach groups. However, little is known regarding how best to facilitate engagement in remote PD among family caregivers. Objective: This study aims to (1) understand the context, quality, and outcomes of family caregivers' engagement experiences in remote PD and (2) learn which aspects of the observed PD approach facilitated engagement or need to be improved. Methods: We analyzed qualitative and quantitative data from evaluation and reflection surveys and interviews completed by research and community partners (family caregivers) across 4 remote PD studies. Studies focused on building digital health interventions for family caregivers. For each study, community partners met with research partners for 4 to 5 design sessions across 6 months. After each session, partners completed an evaluation survey. In 1 of the 4 studies, research and community partners completed a reflection survey and interview. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative evaluation and reflection survey data, while reflexive thematic analysis was used to understand qualitative data. Results: In 62.9% (83/132) of evaluations across projects 1-3, participants described the session as "very effective." In 74% (28/38) of evaluations for project 4, participants described feeling "extremely satisfied" with the session. Qualitative data relating to the engagement context identified that the identities of partners, the technological context of remote PD, and partners' understanding of the project and their role all influenced engagement. Within the domain of engagement quality, relationship-building and co-learning; satisfaction with prework, design activities, time allotted, and the final prototype; and inclusivity and the distribution of influence contributed to partners' experience of engagement. Outcomes of engagement included partners feeling an ongoing interest in the project after its conclusion, gratitude for participation, and a sense of meaning and self-esteem. Conclusions: These results indicate high satisfaction with remote PD processes and few losses specific to remote PD. The results also demonstrate specific ways in which processes can be changed to improve partner engagement and outcomes. Community partners should be involved from study inception in defining the problem to be solved, the approach used, and their roles within the project. Throughout the design process, online tools may be used to check partners' satisfaction with design processes and perceptions of inclusivity and power-sharing. Emphasis should be placed on increasing the psychosocial benefits of engagement (eg, sense of community and purpose) and increasing opportunities to participate in disseminating findings and in future studies.