Abstract
The importance of codesigning digital health tools for suicide prevention has gained popularity since 2012. Promoted as cost-effective and innovative, digital health tools are widely used but seldom described or evaluated from a codesign lens. This scoping review provides an overview of the research and gaps in the delivery of codesigned digital health tools for suicide prevention. This review is phase two within a three-phase study. Phase one involved a scoping review protocol which informed this scoping review and the results will contribute to a proof-of-concept project to develop a digital tool for suicide prevention (phase three).
The search strategy followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR) and Population, Concept, Context (PCC) framework to ensure reporting standards were maintained and supplemented by Arksey and O’Malley and Levac et al. The search dates occurred from November 2022 to March 2023. Five data bases were searched: Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Grey literature searches included government, non-government health websites, Google and Google Scholar.
3260 records were identified from the initial search and 61 were included in the final review. All members of the research team screened the included records. Data from published and grey literature were extracted and a narrative approach identified the results and five themes (acceptability by users, future inclusion of experts-by-experience, inconsistent use of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI), digital tools to supplement face-to-face therapy and digital divide).
We found that none of the data from the included studies used codesign methodology and experts-by-experience roles were minimised as members of focus groups, advisory groups, pilot studies or at the final stage of usability testing. Future research is required where codesign involves co-authorship with experts-by experience, end-to-end partnership from design, implementation and evaluation of digital health tools for suicide prevention.
Author summary As more people turn to digital technology (such as mobile apps and websites) to help with their mental health, they enjoy many of the benefits such as feeling less judged and being more affordable than face-to-face therapy. There are also risks involved such as how privacy is managed and reliance on the distressed person to self-manage their signs and symptoms. We found that people who have experienced suicidal thoughts and carers did not have an equal voice with those that developed the digital tools for suicide prevention. Our group comprising of experts-by-experience, health professionals, a mental health nursing student, technology expert and researchers felt that there was a gap in this area and met on a monthly basis for one year to see what the literature was saying. We found that the term codesign was used a lot but when we looked deeper into the articles and websites, we noted that experts-by-experience were only included to test apps or were involved in focus or advisory groups. We will be using the information from this scoping review to apply for funding to develop a digital solution that is truly designed with and by the people that need it the most.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070329
Funding Statement
This research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Yorkshire and Humber Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR Yorkshire and Humber PSTRC). Project Reference: SICF 2022-02. The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The primary investigator is employed by the University of Bradford. The funds were distributed to the university to pay for release time for the Primary Investigator and recruitment of a research assistant. The majority of the funds were distributed to the experts by experience group and research assistant. As part of codesign methodology all members of the group were involved in reviewing the literature and developing the study, reviewing and publishing the findings
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics was granted by the University of Bradford on 15 August 2022, reference E995. Study registration number Safety (Mental Health) Innovation Challenge Fund 2022–2023 Protocol RM0223/42079 Ver 0.1
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.