. 2021 Feb 3;36(4):1041–1048. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06451-4

Table 1.

Comparison of Intervention Design Steps Using Traditional HSR vs. HCD Methods

Traditional HSR	Human-centered design
Define the research question Review existing evidence (e.g., examine available health system quality and cost data, conduct patient/clinician surveys or interviews) Design an intervention guided by established theory (e.g., considering the relationship between context or behavior and outcomes, or process and outcomes) Test the effectiveness of the intervention (e.g., randomized controlled trial)	Seek inspiration through observations, interviews, research (e.g., observe workflows where the intervention will take place, interview patients and other caregivers in their homes, review published evidence, observe analogous settings) Ideate by cycling between brainstorming, prototyping, and testing (e.g., discuss possible solutions within the team, develop physical prototypes, solicit feedback from end-users) Implement and evaluate in an iterative fashion (execution, evaluation, evolution)

Traditional HSR

Human-centered design

Define the research question

Review existing evidence (e.g., examine available health system quality and cost data, conduct patient/clinician surveys or interviews)

Design an intervention guided by established theory (e.g., considering the relationship between context or behavior and outcomes, or process and outcomes)

Test the effectiveness of the intervention (e.g., randomized controlled trial)

Seek inspiration through observations, interviews, research (e.g., observe workflows where the intervention will take place, interview patients and other caregivers in their homes, review published evidence, observe analogous settings)

Ideate by cycling between brainstorming, prototyping, and testing (e.g., discuss possible solutions within the team, develop physical prototypes, solicit feedback from end-users)

Implement and evaluate in an iterative fashion (execution, evaluation, evolution)