Jasper Faber

Chapter 7 138 example, by simplifying medical content, using plain language, incorporating visual aids, or improving the usability and user experience of eHealth systems (Chan & Kaufman, 2011). Another strategy could be to foster a sense of achievement and control to improve self-efficacy. This can be achieved through setting realistic health goals, providing positive reinforcement, and enabling users to track their progress (Kok et al., 2016; Michie et al., 2009). Finally, this group could be supported through community and support networks. Social support is a significant motivator and can aid in adherence to health interventions for this group (Teuscher et al., 2015). Community features such as peer support groups or integration with existing social networks can provide the necessary emotional and motivational support. Beyond aiding this group, addressing these needs could also benefit a wider audience facing challenges with self-efficacy and literacy, beyond those defined by lowSEP criteria. Designs targeting specific needs and inclusivity have proven to benefit a wider audience (Sutherland, 2019). Subtitles, for instance, help not only people who are deaf or hard of hearing but also those in noisy environments. Ramps help not only those in wheelchairs but also those with heavy luggage. This applies to eHealth design too. People’s needs fluctuate; someone might fit one profile today and another tomorrow. Designing for diverse groups does not just include specific societal groups; it also accommodates the changing needs of individuals, making eHealth solutions more inclusive overall. 7.4.1.3 Complexly Challenged The “Complexly Challenged” subgroup warrants specific attention in our discussion because it represents the stereotype often associated with the low-SEP demographic. These individuals are often entangled in a complex web of personal, social, economic, and environmental challenges, such as persistent debt, intricate family dynamics, neighborhood influence, or the impact of adverse life events (Heutink et al., 2010; Pampel et al., 2010). It is crucial to clarify that the “Complexly Challenged” subgroup represents a suggestive subgroup based on the remaining more negative attitude profiles from Chapter 2. Although the attitude profiles indicate that this group does not encompass the entirety of the low-SEP demographic, their unique perspective necessitates a further examination of the implications of eHealth intervention development for this subgroup. This group, presumably most affected by challenging life circumstances, finds their ability and willingness to prioritize and manage health-related behavior and use eHealth interventions compromised. This group might, therefore, benefit more from programs aimed at debt relief, stable housing, social welfare, and community support

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw