7 General Discussion 139 systems. A good example is an initiative currently in place to improve the habitability of a disadvantaged area in Rotterdam by addressing education, labor, living, security, and culture (NPRZ, 2024). Such an integral approach seems necessary to reach the conditions for this group to start thinking about improving their health and using eHealth interventions (Heutink et al., 2010). Health interventions that take this integral approach, such as integrated lifestyle interventions, could be valuable for this group to make their first steps toward improving their life. The role of eHealth for this group appears to be relatively minor. Due to the complex life situation of this group, we could aim, with eHealth interventions, to make the desired behavior as effortless and enjoyable as possible, for example, through gamification. The goal should not be to push them into adopting a healthier lifestyle top-down; instead, we should aim to gently, from the bottom-up, pull them by creating an environment that fits their specific challenges and naturally encourages positive health behavior. 7.4.2 Implications for knowledge sharing During our participatory development sessions with professionals, it became clear that there is a gap between their needs regarding equitable eHealth development and current information and resources. The standard approach of using academic publications and detailed reports does not align with the practical needs of most professionals. While policymakers favor this traditional format for its emphasis on robust data for evidencebased decisions, practitioners like developers and healthcare providers seek more directly applicable information. This situation underscores a misalignment between academic knowledge outputs and the practical needs of professionals working with eHealth interventions and low-SEP groups. Recognizing the complexity of such endeavors highlights the necessity for a “translational step” to connect theory with practice. As introduced by (Höök & Löwgren, 2012), the concept of intermediary knowledge presents tools like guides, prototypes, and annotated portfolios that can act as a bridge to make knowledge more practical and accessible. While the traditional approach remains most suitable for fundamental research, more is needed to effectively meet the demands of applied research aimed at designing eHealth interventions for and with low-SEP groups. We should consider shifting our output and knowledge sharing toward practical outcomes to address this imbalance. Funding institutions could prioritize projects that demonstrate the practical application of equitable eHealth interventions, while academic journals could place greater emphasis on the translation of knowledge into practical and feasible solutions. The situated knowledge from these applied endeavors can become the fundament for practical, applicable, and usable knowledge tools.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw