JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Transitioning tools from paper-based to web-based formats represents a major shift in social and healthcare settings. Digital tools can enhance accessibility, interactivity, and personalization, yet they also require careful adaptation of content, design, and workflows. Despite the growing number of digital tools, limited evidence exists on how these transitions are executed and what challenges and strategies shape their success.

Objective:

This scoping review mapped how social healthcare tools have transitioned from paper to web formats and examined (1) tool characteristics and target groups, (2) adaptations made during transition, (3) strategies and methodologies employed, and (4) challenges encountered and corresponding solutions.

Methods:

Following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework, systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify empirical, English-language studies describing paper-to-web transitions of social healthcare tools e.g. internet-based technologies intended to enhance communication, foster reflective practices, and support informed decision-making in patients, healthcare professionals and/or family caregiver in social and healthcare settings. Gray literature was used to supplement missing details for included tools. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted, and synthesized data using a standardized form. Findings were summarized narratively and in tables.

Results:

Eleven tools: eight web-based formats, two mobile apps and one game-based tool. They targeted diverse populations, including older adults, people with cancer or dementia and their caregivers, parents, adolescents, pregnant women, and healthcare professionals. Main reasons for transitioning were to improve accessibility and reach (n=7), enhance engagement and interactivity (n=5), and increase efficiency (n=3). Most tools retained core content but introduced multimedia features, interactive modules, adaptive feedback, and usability enhancements such as simplified navigation or customized login systems. User-centered and participatory design approaches, often combined with iterative or agile methods, guided development in most cases. Reported challenges included usability issues among users with limited digital literacy, low engagement, technical integration problems, administrative delays, and budget constraints. Solutions included iterative redesign, increased interactivity, improved instructions, and hybrid paper–digital options to accommodate varying needs and contexts.

Conclusions:

Transitioning social healthcare tools from paper to digital formats expands accessibility and flexibility while introducing new design and equity challenges. User-centered, participatory, and iterative development processes are critical for achieving usability, inclusivity, and sustainability. Future research should focus on equitable design, adaptability across digital infrastructures, and strategies to prevent widening the digital divide.