JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The exponential growth of health information technology (HIT) has potential to facilitate community engagement in research. However, little is known about the use of HIT in community engaged research (CEnR), including the types of HIT used, the populations engaged, and the research outcomes.

Objective:

The objectives of this scoping review were to examine studies that used HIT for community engagement and to assess: 1) the types of populations included in studies, 2) community engagement strategies utilized, 3) types of HIT tools, and 4) outcomes of interest measured.

Methods:

We searched PubMed and PCORI Literature Explorer using terms relating to HIT, health informatics, community engagement, and stakeholder involvement. This search process yielded 967 articles for screening. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, a total of 37 articles were analyzed for key themes and for approaches relevant to HIT and community engagement research.

Results:

This analysis revealed that the communities engaged were generally underrepresented populations in health-related research, including racial/ethnic minority communities, such as Black/African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Latinx, and communities from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The studies focused on various age groups, ranging from preschoolers for designing apps for health snacking to older adults for soliciting input around supportive neighborhoods. The studies were also geographically spread across the US and globally. Community engagement strategies utilized included collaborative development of HIT tools and partnerships to promote use (encompassing collaborative development, use of community advisory boards, and focus groups for eliciting information needs) and use of HIT to engage communities in research, e.g., through citizen science. The types of technology used varied across studies, with mobile or tablet-based apps being the most common platform. Outcomes measured included eliciting user needs and requirements, assessing HIT tools and prototypes with participants, measuring knowledge, and advocating for community change.

Conclusions:

This study illustrates the current landscape at the intersection of HIT tools and CEnR approaches. It highlights studies wherein various CEnR approaches were used to design culturally centered HIT tools, promote HIT uptake, or were used for engagement in health research and advocacy. Our findings can serve as a platform for generating future research by expanding scope of HIT tools and their use for meaningful stakeholder engagement. Studies that incorporate community context and needs have a greater chance of co-creating culturally centered HIT tools and better knowledge to promote action and improve health outcomes.