Background The biodesign process, which originated at Stanford University, has had a significant impact on medical device invention. Design thinking skills are core elements in the biodesign process, but there has been no quantitative evaluation of how design thinking is actually affected by a biodesign course. The purpose of this study was to examine the usefulness of the biodesign process by quantifying design thinking ability. Methods We recruited 17 participants who had studied a systematic biodesign process in Japan and 20 participants who were unfamiliar with the biodesign process. All participants took the design thinking test and we evaluated their design thinking skills using a combination of the creation score and the evaluation score. Results The average age of the participants was 34.4 years and 84% were male. Participants who had taken the biodesign program generated more ideas than other participants (5.3±1.9 ideas vs 3.7±2.3 ideas; p=0.01). They also had significantly higher design thinking score, especially creation score, than those who had not taken the program (design thinking score, 220.1±39.7 vs 194.6±32.1; p=0.02; creation score, 91.3±23.0 vs 70.7±20.2; p=0.03). Conclusion The findings suggest that the biodesign process can cultivate design thinking skills, especially the ability to visualise needs and create solutions. Exposure of more people to the biodesign process may accelerate innovation in the medical technology field. Data are available on reasonable request.

中文翻译：

---

通过日本的生物设计过程培养设计思维能力

背景 起源于斯坦福大学的生物设计过程对医疗器械发明产生了重大影响。设计思维技能是生物设计过程中的核心要素，但尚未对生物设计课程对设计思维的实际影响进行定量评估。本研究的目的是通过量化设计思维能力来检验生物设计过程的有用性。方法 我们招募了 17 名在日本研究过系统生物设计过程的参与者和 20 名不熟悉生物设计过程的参与者。所有参与者都参加了设计思维测试，我们结合创作分数和评估分数来评估他们的设计思维能力。结果参与者的平均年龄为34.4岁，84%为男性。参加生物设计计划的参与者比其他参与者产生了更多的想法（5.3±1.9 个想法对 3.7±2.3 个想法；p=0.01）。他们的设计思维得分，尤其是创造得分也显着高于未参加课程的人（设计思维得分，220.1±39.7 vs 194.6±32.1；p=0.02；创作得分，91.3±23.0 vs 70.7±20.2；p =0.03)。结论 研究结果表明，生物设计过程可以培养设计思维技能，尤其是可视化需求和创造解决方案的能力。让更多人接触生物设计过程可能会加速医疗技术领域的创新。可根据合理要求提供数据。尤其是创作得分，高于未参加该课程的人（设计思维得分，220.1±39.7 vs 194.6±32.1；p=0.02；创作得分，91.3±23.0 vs 70.7±20.2；p=0.03）。结论 研究结果表明，生物设计过程可以培养设计思维技能，尤其是可视化需求和创造解决方案的能力。让更多人接触生物设计过程可能会加速医疗技术领域的创新。可根据合理要求提供数据。尤其是创作得分，高于未参加该课程的人（设计思维得分，220.1±39.7 vs 194.6±32.1；p=0.02；创作得分，91.3±23.0 vs 70.7±20.2；p=0.03）。结论 研究结果表明，生物设计过程可以培养设计思维技能，尤其是可视化需求和创造解决方案的能力。让更多人接触生物设计过程可能会加速医疗技术领域的创新。可根据合理要求提供数据。让更多人接触生物设计过程可能会加速医疗技术领域的创新。可根据合理要求提供数据。让更多人接触生物设计过程可能会加速医疗技术领域的创新。可根据合理要求提供数据。