Methods and Benefits of Measuring Human-Centered Design in Global Health

7Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E), a new frontier for human-centered design (HCD), is still largely unexplored. In global health, M&E is considered essential to good practice, and evidence and data are critical tools in program design, performance monitoring, impact evaluation, and adaptation and learning. As HCD is increasingly integrated into global health practice, designers and global health practitioners are learning as they go how to integrate measurement into design and adapt traditional M&E approaches to design-influenced global health projects. This article illustrates some of the tensions inherent in the way global health and HCD practitioners approach measurement, using several cases to illustrate the ways in which tensions can be managed. Using framing introduced by the MeasureD project, which aimed to audit measurement practices in HCD (called social design in the MeasureD project), we explore 3 recent examples of design-influenced global health interventions: 1 focusing on products, 1 on behavior change, and 1 on service improvement, to extract learning about how teams used measurement, for what purpose, and to what effect. In comparing these examples and recent experience, we report on the steps being taken toward greater alignment in the use of measurement to advance human-centered global health programming.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Heller, C., LaFond, A., & Murthy, L. (2021). Methods and Benefits of Measuring Human-Centered Design in Global Health. Global Health Science and Practice, 9, S274–S282. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00207

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free