Chapter 4 84 and scientific papers) are not suitable to cater to all professionals’ needs. For example, the developers who participated in this study needed information on various phases (e.g., development and evaluation) because they are likely to be involved in different phases of intervention design. This result aligns with previous studies indicating that, within eHealth development, there is a need for flexible and agile development (van Gemert-Pijnen et al., 2018). The health care providers in this study seemed to express less interest in the design process and more in using eHealth and reaching the target group. This is not surprising, as care professionals face many obstacles during the implementation of eHealth interventions due to the lack of explicit training materials and assistance for eHealth users (Swinkels et al., 2018). Some health care providers do not know how to motivate their patients with a low SEP and support them to use eHealth interventions. Swinkels et al. (2018) conclude that explicit instructions and tips (from other health care professionals) are needed to encourage and persuade patients to use eHealth. The researchers that participated in this study specifically wanted to develop a comprehensive view of the available information to increase awareness of developments in eHealth and vulnerable groups and further organize their research. Researchers in this area mainly use an explorative approach that relies on trial and error (Du & Evans, 2011), making it an uncertain search strategy. As a result, they may not have a clear path for gathering the information. It is notable that policy makers were the least enthusiastic about the current content of the guide. According to the literature, health policy professionals want to make well-informed decisions based on the best available evidence (Oxman et al., 2006). This may explain why the policy makers in this study valued formal evidence-based information more than user perspectives, indicating that reports and guidelines may better fit their goals than practical information or user perspectives. Understanding the guide users’ goals can help us make the guide more suitable for their needs. 4.4.4 User perspective A noteworthy finding in this research is that professionals acknowledge the significance of incorporating the perspective of the low-SEP target group. Our findings align with the perspectives of (Kayser et al., 2015) and (van Velsen et al., 2012), who emphasize the importance of considering user perspectives, as losing focus on the user perspective can lead to overlooking the needs of the stakeholders. However, we encountered challenges in determining effective ways to represent this user perspective. Our findings suggest that user representations of the low-SEP target group that offer a balance between abstract concepts and realistic representations are preferred over fictional,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw