# Conceptual Framework to guide design decisions Source [[Book - Digital Therapeutics for Mental Health and Addiction]] - Page 137 Essentially, there is no clear, simple, standard way to go about this. # Intervention Design: What health outcomes are we trying to impact? 1. This reminded me of the PADI approach, the "Problem Definition" asking those questions to understand the problem, current situation, understanding the gaps, and perspective. 2. What level of evidence do we need? 1. This could be from literature, stakeholders, interviews etc. 3. Through this process, the understanding can change the goals, and aim.. or the Problem became something else. 1. Page 139 - "Regardless of the methodological approach, the formative work stage helps researchers iteratively formulate and clarify the problem they are trying to solve." 1. After asking Problems, also ask about Desired Outcome, then what are the Constraints/Barriers from getting there? Every intervention/ideas may be constraints.. and therefore, need to balance it.. different "both" positions. 2. What kinds of intervention components should we provide? (and to whom and when?) 1. This could be based on theoretical bases for including a component, however, theories often lack the degree of specificity that guide how to design. (After trial, then qualitatively evaluate to help understand) # Study Design: What are we trying to learn? # What are we risking in terms of health impacts if we get this decision wrong? - How strong does the evidence need to be to make a design decision? - How much is at stake if we get this design decision wrong?