Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30758298›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2019

The MomConnect Nurses and Midwives Support Platform (NurseConnect): A Qualitative Process Evaluation.

Alex Emilio Fischer, Jane Sebidi, Peter Barron, Samanta Tresha Lalla-Edward

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Healthcare Workers' Perspectives of mHealth Adoption Factors in the Developing World: Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alex Emilio FischerWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-6882-7245
Jane SebidiHIV/AIDS, TB and MCWH, National Department of Health, Government of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-5654-4742
Peter BarronHIV/AIDS, TB and MCWH, National Department of Health, Government of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-1202-9834
Samanta Tresha Lalla-EdwardWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3597-1643
University of the Witwatersrand · ZAGovernment of South Africa · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decade, mobile health has steadily increased in low-income and middle-income countries. However, few platforms have been able to sustainably scale up like the MomConnect program in South Africa. NurseConnect was created as a capacity building component of MomConnect, aimed at supporting nurses and midwives in maternal and child health. The National Department of Health has committed to expanding NurseConnect to all nurses across the country, and an evaluation of the current user experience was conducted to inform a successful scale up.

objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the perception and use of NurseConnect by nurses and midwives to produce feedback that can be used to optimize the user experience as the platform continues to scale up.

methodsWe conducted focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with 110 nurses and midwives from 18 randomly selected health care facilities across South Africa. Questions focused on mobile phone use, access to medical information and their experience with NurseConnect registration, as well as the content and different platforms.

resultsAll participants had mobile phones and communication through calls and messaging was the main use in both personal and work settings. Of 110 participants, 108 (98.2%) had data-enabled phones, and the internet, Google, and apps (South African National Department of Health Guidelines, iTriage, Drugs.com) were commonly used, especially to find information in the work setting. Of 110 participants, 62 (56.4%) were registered NurseConnect users and liked the message content, especially listeriosis and motivational messages, which created behavioral change in some instances. The mobisite and helpdesk, however, were underutilized because of a lack of information surrounding these platforms. Some participants did not trust medical information from websites and had more confidence in apps, while others associated a "helpdesk" with a call-in service, not a messaging one. Many of the unregistered participants had not heard of NurseConnect, and some cited data and time constraints as barriers to both registration and uptake.

conclusionsMobile and smartphone penetration was very high, and participants often used their phone to find medical information. The NurseConnect messages were well-liked by all registered participants; however, the mobisite and helpdesk were underutilized owing to a lack of information and training around these platforms. Enhanced marketing and training initiatives that optimize existing social networks, as well as the provision of data and Wi-Fi, should be explored to ensure that registration improves, and that users are active across all platforms.

Indexed as

Nurse-Patient RelationsAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedMothersNurse MidwivesPregnancyQualitative ResearchSouth AfricaevaluationmHealthmobile phoneMomConnectNurseConnectSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID30758298
PMCPMC6391642
OpenAlexW2914582092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.