Iedereen telt mee: Samen digitale zorgtechnologieën creëren
Iedereen telt mee: Samen digitale zorgtechnologieën creëren
We gebruiken allemaal digitale technologie, of het nu is om online boodschappen te doen, te videobellen met familie, of om een app te raadplegen voor onze gezondheid. Maar wat als jij als patiënt zélf mee kan bepalen hoe die technologieën eruitzien? Dat is niet alleen mogelijk, maar zelfs essentieel voor betere, gebruiksvriendelijke en inclusieve zorg.
Digitale zorg is overal, maar nog niet voor iedereen
Digitale gezondheidstechnologieën (DGT) zijn niet meer weg te denken uit onze samenleving. Van smartwatches die je hartslag meten tot apps die je herinneren aan medicatie, technologie kan onze gezondheid sterk ondersteunen. Toch lopen veel mensen tegen hindernissen aan: ingewikkelde apps, gebrek aan digitale vaardigheden of gewoon het gevoel "dit is niet voor mij".
Uit onderzoek blijkt dat bijna een derde van de Belgische bevolking moeite heeft met gezondheidsinformatie begrijpen en gebruiken. Digitale ongelijkheid zorgt ervoor dat vooral ouderen, mensen met minder opleiding en mensen in een kwetsbare situatie achterblijven. Bovendien voelt niet iedereen zich comfortabel met nieuwe technologieën, waardoor ze belangrijke kansen missen om hun gezondheid beter te beheren.
Samen beslissen over de zorg van morgen
Mijn onderzoek toont aan dat patiënten en burgers actief kunnen én moeten deelnemen aan het ontwikkelen van zorgtechnologieën. Dit noemen we 'co-creatie'. Hierbij werken patiënten, zorgverleners en technologie-ontwikkelaars samen om oplossingen te ontwerpen die aansluiten bij de echte behoeften van gebruikers.
Mensen zijn vaak bang dat ze niet genoeg technische kennis hebben om bij te dragen, maar juist het tegenovergestelde is waar: de inbreng van patiënten die zelf dagelijks met gezondheidsuitdagingen leven is van onschatbare waarde. Door vanuit eigen ervaring aan te geven waar ze tegenaan lopen, zorgen patiënten ervoor dat nieuwe technologieën beter aansluiten bij hun dagelijks leven. Het is daarom dat het zo belangrijk is om de echte eindgebruiker te betrekken bij de ontwikkelingen van DGT, en dat is liefst van al de meest kwetsbare groepen zoals bijvoorbeeld ouderen.
"...zodat de deelnemende groep meer mensen bevat die hopelijk de technologie in het echte leven kunnen gebruiken" - een deelnemer aan de interviews
Iedereen kan meedoen: ervaring is belangrijker dan techniek
Je hoeft absoluut geen tech-expert te zijn om mee te denken over nieuwe zorgtechnologieën. In mijn interviews gaven deelnemers duidelijk aan dat ervaringsdeskundigheid – jouw dagelijkse leven en ervaring als patiënt – minstens zo belangrijk is als technische kennis.
Patiënten kunnen meedenken in elke fase van technologie-ontwikkeling: van het bedenken van ideeën en ontwerpen, tot het testen en verbeteren van de uiteindelijke technologie. Zo zorgen we ervoor dat nieuwe toepassingen toegankelijker, begrijpelijker en effectiever zijn. Denk bijvoorbeeld aan apps met grotere letters voor mensen met verminderd zicht, of technologieën die eenvoudige instructies bieden voor wie moeite heeft met digitale processen.
Wat levert het op?
Door co-creatie ontstaan gebruiksvriendelijke toepassingen, afgestemd op echte behoeften. Dit leidt tot minder frustratie en betere zorgervaringen voor patiënten. Verder krijgen zorgverleners technologieën die hun werk daadwerkelijk ondersteunen, terwijl ontwikkelaars producten maken die succesvol worden gebruikt en gewaardeerd.
Daarnaast zorgt betrokkenheid van patiënten ervoor dat zij zich beter gehoord en gewaardeerd voelen, wat leidt tot meer vertrouwen in en acceptatie van digitale zorg. Dit vertrouwen is cruciaal om technologie op grote schaal succesvol te integreren in onze dagelijkse zorgpraktijken.
Hoe kunnen we starten?
Mijn onderzoek benadrukt dat het belangrijk is om meer bewustzijn te creëren en drempels voor deelname te verlagen. Overheden, zorgorganisaties en technologiebedrijven moeten samenwerken om patiënten te betrekken. Digitale vaardigheden kunnen worden versterkt via gerichte trainingen, en door een duidelijk aanspreekpunt te bieden voor technische hulp.
Ook zouden er toegankelijke workshops en interactieve sessies moeten komen waarin patiënten op een laagdrempelige manier kennismaken met digitale zorgtechnologieën. Hierdoor worden patiënten niet alleen geïnformeerd, maar ook gemotiveerd om actief deel te nemen.
Praktijkvoorbeelden: Co-creatie in actie
Uit mijn onderzoek kwamen concrete voorbeelden naar voren waarbij co-creatie leidde tot praktische verbeteringen. Zo zorgden patiënten ervoor dat apps voor diabetesmanagement eenvoudiger en gebruiksvriendelijker werden door feedback te geven op de navigatie en leesbaarheid. Een ander voorbeeld is een digitaal platform dat mede dankzij input van patiënten werd aangepast om beter aan te sluiten bij de dagelijkse routines van chronische pijnpatiënten.
De toekomst is inclusief
Samen digitale zorg creëren betekent dat iedereen meetelt en gehoord wordt. Alleen zo bouwen we aan een zorglandschap waarin technologie écht ondersteunend is. Iedereen kan en mag meedoen, want iedereen verdient zorg die begrijpelijk, bruikbaar en inclusief is. Laat je niet ontmoedigen door techniek: jouw ervaring is de sleutel tot betere zorgtechnologieën. Samen zorgen we voor een toekomst waarin digitale zorg voor iedereen binnen handbereik is.
Bibliografie
1. Brotcorne P, Ponnet K. Barometer Digitale Inclusie [Internet]. Brussels: King Baudouin Foundation; 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 15]. 45 p. Available from: https://www.kbs-frb.be/nl/barometer-digitale-inclusie-2024
2. Van Kolfschooten H, van Oirschot J, Collado D. Policy brief: Digital Health Literacy: A Cornerstone of Health Equity in the EU [Internet]. Netherlands: Health Action International; 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 15]. 3 p. Available from: https://haiweb.org/publication/digital-health-literacy-a-cornerstone-of…
3. Sham S, Shiwlani S, Kirshan Kumar S, Bai P, Bendari A. Empowering Patients Through Digital Health Literacy and Access to Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) in the Developing World. Cureus [Internet]. 2024 Apr 3 [cited 2024 Nov 15]; 16(4):e57527. Available from: https://www.cureus.com/articles/241615-empowering-patients-through-digi…
4. Government of the Republic of Singapore. Smart Nation 2.0: a thriving digital future for all [Internet]. Singapore: Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI); 2024. 96 p. [cited 2025 Feb 5]. Available from: https://smartnation.be/nl/over
5. Dabbs ADV, Myers BA, Mc Curry KR, Dunbar-Jacob J, Hawkins RP, Begey A, et al. User-Centered Design and Interactive Health Technologies for Patients. CIN Comput Inform Nurs [Internet]. 2009 May [cited 2024 Nov 9];27(3):175–83. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/00024665-200905000-00011
6. Regulation (EU) 2024/... of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 on the European Health Data Space and amending Directive 2011/24/EU and Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 (European Health Data Space Regulation) Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32025R0327
7. Cheng C, Beauchamp A, Elsworth GR, Osborne RH. Applying the Electronic Health Literacy Lens: Systematic Review of Electronic Health Interventions Targeted at Socially Disadvantaged Groups. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2020 Aug 13 [cited 2024 Nov 14];22(8):e18476. Available from: http://www.jmir.org/2020/8/e18476/
8. United Nations General Assembly Economic and Social Council. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Report of Secretary-General [Internet]. United Nations; 2024 May 2 [cited 2024 Nov 14]. 26 p. Reports no.: A/79/79-E/2024/54. Available from: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2024/SG-SDG-Progress-Report-20…
9. World Health Organization. Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025 [Internet]. 1st ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. 1 p. [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/344249
10. Laurisz N, Ćwiklicki M, Żabiński M, Canestrino R, Magliocca P. The Stakeholders’ Involvement in Healthcare 4.0 Services Provision: The Perspective of Co-Creation. Int J Environ Res Public Health [Internet]. 2023 Jan 29 [cited 2024 Nov 20];20(3):2416. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2416
11. Conard S. Best practices in digital health literacy. Int J Cardiol [Internet]. 2019 Oct [cited 2024 Nov 14];292:277–9. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167527319316523
12. Mbunge E, Muchemwa B, Jiyane S, Batani J. Sensors and healthcare 5.0: transformative shift in virtual care through emerging digital health technologies. Glob Health J [Internet]. 2021 Dec [cited 2025 Feb 5];5(4):169–77. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2414644721000932
13. Burgess ER, Kaziunas E, Jacobs M. Care Frictions: A Critical Reframing of Patient Noncompliance in Health Technology Design. Proc ACM Hum-Comput Interact [Internet]. 2022 Nov 7 [cited 2024 Nov 20];6(CSCW2):1–31. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555172
14. OECD, European Commission. Health at a Glance: Europe 2024: State of Health in the EU Cycle [Internet]. OECD; 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 19]. (Health at a Glance: Europe). Available from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/health-at-…
15. Zorg voor je data: Informatiebrochure over gezondheidsdata [Internet]. Brussel: King Baudouin Foundation; January 2022. 48 p. [cited 2024 Nov 20]. Available from: https://media.kbs-frb.be/nl/media/8912/2022_PUB_3832_Zorg%20voor%20je%2…
16. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 3 May 2022 — A European Health Data Space: harnessing the power of health data for people, patients and innovation (COM/2022/196 final) [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec 6]. Available from: https://primarysources.brillonline.com/browse/human-rights-documents-on…
17. REGULATION (EU) 2016/ 679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL - of 27 April 2016 - on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/ 46/ EC (General Data Protection Regulation) [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 10] Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj
18. Slokenberga S. Scientific research regime 2.0? Transformations of the research regime and the protection of the data subject that the proposed EHDS regulation promises to bring along. Technol Regul [Internet]. 2022 Dec 15 [cited 2024 Dec 15];2022:135–47. Available from: https://techreg.org/article/view/12435
19. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – A European strategy for data (COM(2020) 66 final) [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; 2020 Feb 19 [cited 2025 Feb 10]. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC00…
20. Regulation (EU) 2025/327 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2025 on the European Health Data Space and amending Directive 2011/24/EU and Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 (Text with EEA relevance). [Internet]. [cited 2025 May 20] Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32025R0327
21. Regulation (EU) 2022/868 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on European data governance and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (Data Governance Act) [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 10]. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022R0868
22. Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 and Directive (EU) 2020/1828 (Data Act) [Internet]. [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32023R2854
23. Directive (EU) 2022/2555 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union, amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 and Directive (EU) 2018/1972, and repealing Directive (EU) 2016/1148 (NIS2 Directive) [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec 6]. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02022L255…
24. Koninklijk besluit van 23 maart 2023 tot oprichting van de Gezondheidsdata-autoriteit (Health Data Agency), BS 3 april 2023, p. 32570 [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 10]. Available from: https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2023/04/03_1.pdf#page=27
25. Health Data Agency. Presentation at KCE event: Health Data Agency – Stand van zaken en toekomstperspectieven [Internet]. 27 November 2024 [cited 2025 Mar 10]. Available from: https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/2024-12/12_KCE%2027nov2024.pdf&…;
26. Act of 30 July 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data [Internet]. [cited 2025 May 21]. Available from: https://www.dataprotectionauthority.be/publications/act-of-30-july-2018…
27. Law of 30 July 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data (Belgian Framework Law on GDPR). Belgian Official Gazette. 2018 Sep 5. Available from: https://www.dataprotectionauthority.be/publications/act-of-30-july-2018…;
28. Law of 22 August 2002 on the rights of the patient (Patients’ Rights Law). Belgian Official Gazette [Internet]. 2002 Sep 26 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2002/09/26_1.pdf#Page=33
29. Law of 22 April 2019 on the quality of healthcare practice (Quality Law). Belgian Official Gazette [Internet]. 2019 May 14 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2019/05/14_1.pdf#Page=42
30. Law of 21 August 2008 on the establishment and organisation of the eHealth platform (Belgian eHealth Law). Belgian Official Gazette [Internet]. 2008 Oct 13 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2008/10/13_1.pdf#Page=49
31. Castro EM, Van Regenmortel T, Vanhaecht K, Sermeus W, Van Hecke A. Patient empowerment, patient participation and patient-centeredness in hospital care: A concept analysis based on a literature review. Patient Educ Couns [Internet]. 2016 Dec 1 [cited 2025 May 21];99(12):1923–39. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399116303214
32. World Health Organization. Patient engagement [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016 [cited 2025 May 22]. 26 p. (Technical Series on Safer Primary Care). Available from: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/252269
33. Hickmann E, Richter P, Schlieter H. All together now – patient engagement, patient empowerment, and associated terms in personal healthcare. BMC Health Serv Res [Internet]. 2022 Dec [cited 2025 May 9];22(1):1–11. Available from: https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-022-…
34. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research involving Humans [Internet]. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS); 2016 [cited 2025 Apr 4]. Available from: https://cioms.ch/publications/product/international-ethical-guidelines-…
35. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research involving Humans [Internet]. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS); 2016 [cited 2024 Dec 6]. Available from: https://cioms.ch/publications/product/international-ethical-guidelines-…
36. Marsh K, Caro JJ, Hamed A, Zaiser E. Amplifying Each Patient’s Voice: A Systematic Review of Multi-criteria Decision Analyses Involving Patients. Appl Health Econ Health Policy [Internet]. 2017 Apr [cited 2024 Nov 19];15(2):155–62. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/1924518691/abstract/9852B5C35EC645E3PQ…
37. Tegenbos G, Van den Cruyce N, Vandensande T. Samenwerkende patiënten maken zorg beter en efficiënter: een oproep op basis van onderzoek én ervaring [Internet]. Brussel: King Baudouin Foundation; 2024. 39 p. [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://www.kbs-frb.be/nl/samenwerkende-patienten-maken-zorg-beter
38. Hoos A, Anderson J, Boutin M, Dewulf L, Geissler J, Johnston G, et al. Partnering With Patients in the Development and Lifecycle of Medicines: A Call for Action. Ther Innov Regul Sci [Internet]. 2015 Nov [cited 2024 Nov 28];49(6):929–39. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1177/2168479015580384
39. Brumagne et al. Naar een gezondheidsvaardige eerstelijn: lessen en aanbevelingen voor organisaties en beleid. [Internet]. Brussels: King Baudouin Foundation; 2024. 40 p. [cited 2024 Nov 20]. Available from: https://media.kbs-frb.be/nl/media/11882/2024_PUB_GezondheidsvaardigeEer…;
40. Hunter A, Facey K, Thomas V, Haerry D, Warner K, Klingmann I, et al. EUPATI Guidance for Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development: Health Technology Assessment. Front Med [Internet]. 2018 Sep 6 [cited 2024 Nov 20];5:231. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmed.2018.00231/full
41. Haerry D, Landgraf C, Warner K, Hunter A, Klingmann I, May M, et al. EUPATI and Patients in Medicines Research and Development: Guidance for Patient Involvement in Regulatory Processes. Front Med [Internet]. 2018 Aug 17 [cited 2024 Nov 20];5:230. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmed.2018.00230/full
42. Warner K, See W, Haerry D, Klingmann I, Hunter A, May M. EUPATI Guidance for Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development (R&D); Guidance for Pharmaceutical Industry-Led Medicines R&D. Front Med [Internet]. 2018 Oct 9 [cited 2025 Feb 4];5. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.201…
43. Hämeen-Anttila K, Komulainen J, Enlund H, Mäkelä M, Mäkinen E, Rannanheimo P, et al. Incorporating patient perspectives in health technology assessments and clinical practice guidelines. Res Soc Adm Pharm [Internet]. 2016 Nov [cited 2024 Nov 20];12(6):903–13. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155174111500279X
44. Perfetto EM, Harris J, Mullins CD, dosReis S. Emerging Good Practices for Transforming Value Assessment: Patients’ Voices, Patients’ Values. Value Health [Internet]. 2018 Apr [cited 2024 Nov 20];21(4):386–93. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1098301518301931
45. European Patients’ Academy on Therapeutic Innovation (EUPATI). Patient Expert Training Programme | EUPATI Open Classroom [Internet]. [cited 2025 Apr 4]. Available from: https://learning.eupati.eu/admin/tool/custompage/view.php?id=3
46. Staley K, Doherty C. It’s not evidence, it’s insight: bringing patients’ perspectives into health technology appraisal at NICE. Res Involv Engagem [Internet]. 2016 Dec [cited 2024 Nov 20];2(1):4. Available from: http://www.researchinvolvement.com/content/2/1/4
47. Gagnon MP, Tantchou Dipankui M, Poder TG, Payne-Gagnon J, Mbemba G, Beretta V. Patient and public involvement in health technology assessment: update of a systematic review of international experiences. Int J Technol Assess Health Care [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2024 Nov 20];37(1):e36. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266462321000064/typ…
48. Facey KM, Bedlington N, Berglas S, Bertelsen N, Single ANV, Thomas V. Putting Patients at the Centre of Healthcare: Progress and Challenges for Health Technology Assessments. Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Res [Internet]. 2018 Dec [cited 2024 Nov 20];11(6):581–9. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-018-0325-5
49. Moerenhout T, Vandenhoudt H, Daems W, Vigneron L, Vandensande T. Eight caring technology principles: development and implementation of a framework for responsible health technology innovation. J Responsible Innov [Internet]. 2024 Dec 31 [cited 2024 Dec 19];11(1):2408815. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23299460.2024.2408815
50. Yrttiaho T, Giunti G, Isomursu M. Challenges Implementing Patient and Public Involvement in a Digital Health Agile Project Which Includes Research, Business and Software Development. In: Mantas J, Hasman A, Demiris G, Saranto K, Marschollek M, Arvanitis TN, et al., editors. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics [Internet]. IOS Press; 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 20]. Available from: https://ebooks.iospress.nl/doi/10.3233/SHTI240406
51. Asabor EN, Aneni K, Weerakoon S, Opara I. Applying a community-engaged participatory machine learning model. Am J Community Psychol [Internet]. [cited 2024 Nov 20];n/a(n/a). Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajcp.12765
52. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). Best practices in engaging stakeholders [Internet]. Washington (DC): PCORI; [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://research-teams.pcori.org/stakeholders
53. Caring Technology. 8 guiding principles for caring technology [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec 3]. Available from: https://www.caringtechnology.be/
54. Kaisler RE, Missbach B. Co-creating a patient and public involvement and engagement ‘how to’ guide for researchers. Res Involv Engagem [Internet]. 2020 Dec [cited 2024 Nov 26];6(1):32. Available from: https://researchinvolvement.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40900-0…
55. Tebb KP, Leng Trieu S, Rico R, Renteria R, Rodriguez F, Puffer M. A Mobile Health Contraception Decision Support Intervention for Latina Adolescents: Implementation Evaluation for Use in School-Based Health Centers. JMIR MHealth UHealth [Internet]. 2019 Mar 14 [cited 2024 Nov 20];7(3):e11163. Available from: http://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/3/e11163/
56. Kamaruzaman HF, Ku Abd Rahim KN, Mohamed Ghazali IM, Mohd Yusof MA. A voice to be heard: patient and public involvement in health technology assessment and clinical practice guidelines in Malaysia. Int J Technol Assess Health Care [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2024 Nov 14];37(1):e47. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266462321000118/typ…
57. Sørensen K, Van den Broucke S, Pelikan JM, Fullam J, Doyle G, Slonska Z, et al. Measuring health literacy in populations: illuminating the design and development process of the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q). BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2013 Oct 10 [cited 2024 Dec 3];13(1):948. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-948
58. Van Kessel R, Wong BLH, Forman R, Gabrani J, Mossialos E. The European Health Data Space fails to bridge digital divides. BMJ [Internet]. 2022 Jul 8 [cited 2024 Dec 3];e071913. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/bmj-2022-071913
59. Van den Broucke S, Vandenbroeck P, Boon K, Bravo AM. Gezondheidsvaardigheden bevorderen in de eerste lijn: leren van 24 praktijken in België [Internet]. Brussel: King Baudouin Foundation; 2021. 72 p. [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://media.kbs-frb.be/nl/media/8617/2021_PUB_3819_Gezondheidsvaardig…;
60. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2006 Jun 16 [cited 2025 May 25];8(2):e9. Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2006/2/e9/
61. Ban S, Kim Y, Seomun G. Digital health literacy: A concept analysis. Digit Health [Internet]. 2024 Jan 1 [cited 2024 Dec 18];10:20552076241287894. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241287894
62. Benis A, Tamburis O, Chronaki C, Moen A. One Digital Health: A Unified Framework for Future Health Ecosystems. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2021 Feb 5 [cited 2024 Nov 20];23(2):e22189. Available from: http://www.jmir.org/2021/2/e22189/
63. Rondia K, Adriaenssens J, Van Den Broucke S, Kohn L. Health literacy: what lessons can be learned from the experiences of other countries? [Internet]. KCE = Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg = Centre Fédéral d’Expertise des Soins de Santé = Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre; 2019 [cited 2025 Apr 4]. Available from: https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/2021-11/KCE_322_Health_Literacy…
64. European Commission, Directorate-General for the Information Society and Media; TNS Political & Social. European citizens’ digital health literacy: summary [Internet]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2014 [cited 2025 Feb 4]. Available from: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2759/89616
65. HLS19 | M-POHL - WHO Action Network on Measuring Population and Organizational Health Literacy [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec 3]. Available from: https://m-pohl.net/HLS19
66. Kayser L, Kushniruk A, Osborne RH, Norgaard O, Turner P. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Consumer-Focused Health Information Technology Systems Through eHealth Literacy: A Framework for Understanding Users’ Needs. JMIR Hum Factors [Internet]. 2015 May 20 [cited 2024 Nov 14];2(1):e9. Available from: http://humanfactors.jmir.org/2015/1/e9/
67. Fitzpatrick PJ. Improving health literacy using the power of digital communications to achieve better health outcomes for patients and practitioners. Front Digit Health [Internet]. 2023 Nov 17 [cited 2024 Dec 18];5. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fd…
68. Dunn P, Hazzard E. Technology approaches to digital health literacy. Int J Cardiol [Internet]. 2019 Oct [cited 2024 Nov 20];293:294–6. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167527319326518
69. EuroHealthNet. Digital health literacy for Europe’s digital future [Internet]. Brussels: EuroHealthNet; 2022 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://eurohealthnet.eu/wp-content/uploads/publications/2022/220225_di…
70. McCormack LA, McBride CM, Paasche-Orlow MK. Shifting Away from a Deficit Model of Health Literacy. J Health Commun [Internet]. 2016 Aug [cited 2024 Dec 4];21(sup2):4–5. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10810730.2016.1212131
71. Aluttis C, den Broucke SV, Chiotan C, Costongs C, Michelsen K, Brand H. Public health and health promotion capacity at national and regional level: a review of conceptual frameworks. J Public Health Res. 2014 Mar 26;3(1):199. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4140385/
72. Sørensen K, Levin-Zamir D, Duong TV, Okan O, Brasil VV, Nutbeam D. Building health literacy system capacity: a framework for health literate systems. Health Promot Int [Internet]. 2021 Dec 13 [cited 2024 Nov 14];36(Supplement_1):i13–23. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/36/Supplement_1/i13/6460419
73. de Alliantie Gezondheidsvaardigheden [Internet]. [cited 2024 Dec 4]. de Alliantie Gezondheidsvaardigheden. Available from: https://www.gezondheidsvaardigheden.nl
74. World Health Organization. Health literacy: the solid facts [Internet]. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2013 [cited 2025 Feb 4]. Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/339662/69rs09e-HealthLitera…
75. Griebel L, Enwald H, Gilstad H, Pohl AL, Moreland J, Sedlmayr M. eHealth literacy research—Quo vadis? Inform Health Soc Care [Internet]. 2018 Oct 2 [cited 2025 Feb 4];43(4):427–42. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538157.2017.1364247
76. Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (European Commission), European Public Health Alliance, NIVEL, RIVM, Uiters E, Rademakers J, et al. Study on sound evidence for a better understanding of health literacy in the European Union: final report [Internet]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2014 [cited 2024 Dec 4]. Available from: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2818/150402
77. Gomes VP, May M, Geissler J, Bourke S. The power of public and patient involvement in healthcare innovation. Nat Rev Bioeng [Internet]. 2025 May 1 [cited 2025 May 12];1–3. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44222-025-00315-4
78. Phi NTT, Montori VM, Kunneman M, Ravaud P, Tran VT. Cumulative burden of digital health technologies for patients with multimorbidity: a systematic review [Internet]. JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Apr 25;8(4):e257288 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.7288
79. Schulz S, Harzheim L, Hübner C, Lorke M, Jünger S, Buchholz A, et al. Patient Preferences for Long-Term Implant Care in Cochlear, Glaucoma and Cardiovascular Diseases. Int J Environ Res Public Health [Internet]. 2023 Jul 13 [cited 2024 Nov 14];20(14):6358. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/14/6358
80. White TM, Gresle AS, Roqueta J, Pine C, Lazarus JV. Co-Creation of Patient-Centered Metrics for Long-Term Well-Being Involving People with HIV and HIV Care Providers. AIDS Patient Care STDs [Internet]. 2024 Oct 1 [cited 2024 Nov 14];38(10):487–92. Available from: https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/apc.2024.0156
81. Madanian S, Nakarada-Kordic I, Reay S, Chetty T. Patients’ perspectives on digital health tools. PEC Innov [Internet]. 2023 Dec [cited 2024 Nov 14];2:100171. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2772628223000511
82. Bastian H, Scheibler F, Knelangen M, Zschorlich B, Nasser M, Waltering A. Choosing health technology assessment and systematic review topics: The development of priority-setting criteria for patients’ and consumers’ interests. Int J Technol Assess Health Care [Internet]. 2011 Oct [cited 2024 Nov 20];27(4):348–56. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266462311000547/typ…
83. Nouri SS, Avila-Garcia P, Cemballi AG, Sarkar U, Aguilera A, Lyles CR. Assessing Mobile Phone Digital Literacy and Engagement in User-Centered Design in a Diverse, Safety-Net Population: Mixed Methods Study. JMIR MHealth UHealth [Internet]. 2019 Aug 29 [cited 2024 Nov 14];7(8):e14250. Available from: http://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/8/e14250/
84. Bailey JE, Gurgol C, Pan E, Njie S, Emmett S, Gatwood J, et al. Early Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Experience With the Use of Telehealth to Address Disparities: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2021 Dec 7 [cited 2024 Nov 20];23(12):e28503. Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2021/12/e28503
85. Zeller A, Gutenberg J, Niebauer J, Crutzen R, Kulnik ST. Patients’ experiences and perspectives regarding the use of digital technology to support exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a qualitative interview study. Front Sports Act Living [Internet]. 2024 Mar 18 [cited 2024 Nov 20];6:1371652. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2024.1371652/full
86. Houta S, Bader A, Effert JS, Esser B, Henze J, Spaic A, et al. Digital health applications in the self-management of epilepsy—A survey on patients’ perspective. Epilepsia Open [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 20];8(4):1288–99. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/epi4.12788
87. LeRouge C, Wickramasinghe N. A Review of User-Centered Design for Diabetes-Related Consumer Health Informatics Technologies. J Diabetes Sci Technol [Internet]. 2013 Jul [cited 2024 Nov 20];7(4):1039–56. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/193229681300700429
88. Jacob C, Bourke S, Heuss S. From Testers to Cocreators—the Value of and Approaches to Successful Patient Engagement in the Development of eHealth Solutions: Qualitative Expert Interview Study. JMIR Hum Factors [Internet]. 2022 Oct 6 [cited 2024 Nov 20];9(4):e41481. Available from: https://humanfactors.jmir.org/2022/4/e41481
89. Hoving C, Visser A, Mullen PD, Van Den Borne B. A history of patient education by health professionals in Europe and North America: From authority to shared decision making education. Patient Educ Couns [Internet]. 2010 Mar [cited 2024 Nov 20];78(3):275–81. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0738399110000248
90. Finkelstein J, Barr MS, Kothari PP, Nace DK, Quinn M. Patient-Centered Medical Home Cyberinfrastructure. Am J Prev Med [Internet]. 2011 May [cited 2024 Nov 20];40(5):S225–33. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749379711000675
91. Leung K, Lu-McLean D, Kuziemsky C, Booth RG, Collins Rossetti S, Borycki E, et al. Using Patient and Family Engagement Strategies to Improve Outcomes of Health Information Technology Initiatives: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2019 Oct 8 [cited 2024 Nov 20];21(10):e14683. Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2019/10/e14683
92. Lee EW, McCloud RF, Viswanath K. Designing Effective eHealth Interventions for Underserved Groups: Five Lessons From a Decade of eHealth Intervention Design and Deployment. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2022 Jan 7 [cited 2024 Nov 14];24(1):e25419. Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2022/1/e25419
93. Singh KP, Jahnke I, Calyam P. Entangled collaborations: tensions in cross-disciplinary user experience studies in cyberinfrastructure projects. Behav Inf Technol [Internet]. 2024 Feb [cited 2024 Nov 20];0(0):1–21. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2315325
94. Robbins D, Dunn P. Digital health literacy in a person-centric world. Int J Cardiol [Internet]. 2019 Sep [cited 2024 Nov 14];290:154–5. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167527319323927
95. Vanstone M, Abelson J, Bidonde J, Bond K, Burgess R, Canfield C, et al. Ethical Challenges Related to Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2024 Nov 20];35(4):253–6. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266462319000382/typ…
96. Risling T, Martinez J, Young J, Thorp-Froslie N. Defining Empowerment and Supporting Engagement Using Patient Views From the Citizen Health Information Portal: Qualitative Study. JMIR Med Inform [Internet]. 2018 Sep 10 [cited 2024 Nov 20];6(3):e43. Available from: http://medinform.jmir.org/2018/3/e43/
97. Nusir M, Rekik M. Systematic review of co-design in digital health for COVID-19 research. Univers Access Inf Soc [Internet]. 2024 Jun [cited 2024 Nov 21];23(2):637–51. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10209-022-00964-x
98. Bober T, Rollman BL, Handler S, Watson A, Nelson LA, Faieta J, et al. Digital Health Readiness: Making Digital Health Care More Inclusive. JMIR MHealth UHealth [Internet]. 2024 Oct 9 [cited 2024 Dec 18];12:e58035. Available from: https://mhealth.jmir.org/2024/1/e58035
99. Popa V, Geissler J, Vermeulen R, Priest E, Capperella K, Susuzlu G, et al. Delivering Digital Health Solutions that Patients Need: A Call to Action. Ther Innov Regul Sci [Internet]. 2024 Mar 1 [cited 2024 Dec 18];58(2):236–41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-023-00592-4
100. Lawrence K, Rodriguez DV, Feldthouse DM, Shelley D, Yu JL, Belli HM, et al. Effectiveness of an Integrated Engagement Support System to Facilitate Patient Use of Digital Diabetes Prevention Programs: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc [Internet]. 2021 Feb 9 [cited 2024 Nov 20];10(2):e26750. Available from: http://www.researchprotocols.org/2021/2/e26750/
101. Epstein RM, Gramling RE. What Is Shared in Shared Decision Making? Complex Decisions When the Evidence Is Unclear. Med Care Res Rev [Internet]. 2013 Feb [cited 2024 Nov 20];70(1_suppl):94S-112S. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1077558712459216
102. Clemensen J, Holm KG, Jakobsen PR, Jensen CM, Nielsen C, Danbjørg DB, et al. Participatory design in telehealth research: Practical case examples. J Telemed Telecare [Internet]. 2024 Aug 6 [cited 2024 Nov 20];1357633X241262820. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241262820
103. Ray JM, Ratwani RM, Sinsky CA, Frankel RM, Friedberg MW, Powsner SM, et al. Six habits of highly successful health information technology: powerful strategies for design and implementation. J Am Med Inform Assoc [Internet]. 2019 Oct 1 [cited 2024 Nov 20];26(10):1109–14. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/jamia/article/26/10/1109/5527253
104. Whichello C, Van Overbeeke E, Janssens R, Schölin Bywall K, Russo S, Veldwijk J, et al. Factors and Situations Affecting the Value of Patient Preference Studies: Semi-Structured Interviews in Europe and the US. Front Pharmacol [Internet]. 2019 Sep 18 [cited 2024 Nov 20];10:1009. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphar.2019.01009/full
105. Wale, Wale JL, Scott AM, Bertelsen N, Meade N. Strengthening international patient advocacy perspectives on patient involvement in HTA within the HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group – Commentary. Res Involv Engagem [Internet]. 2017 Dec [cited 2024 Nov 20];3(1):3. Available from: http://researchinvolvement.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40900-01…
106. Gunn CJ, Bertelsen N, Regeer BJ, Schuitmaker-Warnaar TJ. Valuing patient engagement: Reflexive learning in evidence generation practices for health technology assessment. Soc Sci Med [Internet]. 2021 Jul [cited 2024 Nov 20];280:114048. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0277953621003804
107. Hansen HP, Lee A. Patient aspects and involvement in HTA: An academic perspective. Pharm Policy Law [Internet]. 2011 Sep [cited 2024 Nov 20];13(3/4):123–8. Available from: https://kuleuven.e-bronnen.be/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/lo…
108. Nelson LA, Pennings JS, Sommer EC, Popescu F, Barkin SL. A 3-Item Measure of Digital Health Care Literacy: Development and Validation Study. JMIR Form Res [Internet]. 2022 Apr 29 [cited 2024 Dec 26];6(4):e36043. Available from: https://formative.jmir.org/2022/4/e36043
109. Barony Sanchez RH, Bergeron-Drolet LA, Sasseville M, Gagnon MP. Engaging patients and citizens in digital health technology development through the virtual space. Front Med Technol [Internet]. 2022 Nov 25 [cited 2024 Dec 18];4:958571. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9732568/
110. Piper AM, Lazar A. Co-design in health: what can we learn from art therapy? Interactions [Internet]. 2018 Apr 23 [cited 2024 Nov 20];25(3):70–3. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3194353
111. Van Velsen L, Ludden G, Grünloh C. The Limitations of User-and Human-Centered Design in an eHealth Context and How to Move Beyond Them. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2022 Oct 5 [cited 2024 Dec 26];24(10):e37341. Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2022/10/e37341
112. Nugent L, Anthony Kouyate R, Jackson S, Smith MY. Development of a Digital Health Intervention for Rheumatoid Arthritis Symptom Management in a Biotechnology Industry Context: Protocol for the Application of a Human-Centered Design Framework. JMIR Res Protoc [Internet]. 2022 Mar 22 [cited 2024 Nov 20];11(3):e16430. Available from: https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/3/e16430
113. AHSN Network. Involvement and co-production strategy [Internet]. May 2021 [cited 2025 May 26]. Available from: https://www.ahsnnetwork.com/about-academic-health-science-networks/pati…
114. Sciensano. Health status report 2021 – The state of health in Belgium [Internet]. Brussels: Sciensano; 2022 [cited 2025 May 26]. Available from: https://www.sciensano.be/sites/default/files/hsr2021_en.pdf
115. Kom op tegen Kanker. Digitalisering in de zorg: een zorg meer, een zorg minder? [Internet]. Brussels: Kom op tegen Kanker; 2024 [cited 2025 May 26]. Available from: https://www.komoptegenkanker.be/sites/default/files/media/2024-03/KOTK2…
116. Sukhera J. Narrative reviews: flexible, rigorous, and practical [Internet]. J Grad Med Educ. 2022 Aug;14(4):414–7 [cited 2025 May 11]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00480.1
117. Okoro A. The innovation cycle vs the innovation funnel [Internet]. Medium. 2019 Jan 7 [cited 2025 May 26]. Available from: https://medium.com/@tonyokoro/the-innovation-cycle-vs-the-innovation-fu…
118. Yap KY, Liu J, Franchi T, Agha RA. The launch of the International Journal of Digital Health: ensuring digital transformation in healthcare beyond COVID-19. Int J Digit Health. 2021 Mar 4;1:2 [cited 2025 May 26]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.29337/ijdh.27
119. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; National Academy of Medicine. Toward equitable innovation in health and medicine: a framework [Internet]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2023 [cited 2025 May 25]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17226/27184
