Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31620459›Full record

ArticlemHealth2019

Perceptions on using interactive voice response surveys for non-communicable disease risk factors in Uganda: a qualitative exploration.

Elizeus Rutebemberwa, Juliana Namutundu, Dustin G Gibson, Alain B Labrique, Joseph Ali, George W Pariyo, Adnan A Hyder

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Elizeus RutebemberwaDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Juliana NamutunduDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Dustin G GibsonDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Alain B LabriqueDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Joseph AliDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
George W PariyoDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Adnan A HyderGeorge Washington University, Milken Institute School of Public Health, Washington, DC, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USMakerere University · UGGeorge Washington University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecision-makers need up to date information on risk factors for effective prevention and control of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Currently available surveys are infrequent and costly to implement. The objective of the study was to explore perceptions on using an interactive voice response (IVR) survey for data collection on NCD risk factors.

methodsFive focus group discussions (FGDs), including rural and urban, elderly and young adults, male and female groups; and eleven key informant interviews (KIIs) of researchers and NCD policy makers were conducted. Respondents were audio recorded and data were transcribed into text. Data were entered into QDA miner software for analysis. Meaningful units were generated and then merged into codes and categories. Quotes are presented highlighting findings.

resultsAt the individual level, age, gender, disability, past experience and being technology literate were perceived as key determinants on whether respondents would accept an IVR survey. Receiving the IVR at a time at which people are usually available to take calls increases participation. However, technological accessibility like presence of a mobile network signal and possession of mobile phones were critical for use of IVR. Participants recommended that community sensitization activities be provided, IVR be conducted at appropriate times and frequency, and that incentives may improve survey participation.

conclusionsIVR has the potential to quickly collect data from a wide geographic scope. However, caution needs to be taken to ensure that certain categories of people are not excluded because of their location, ability, age or gender. Sensitization prior to the survey, proper timing and structured incentives could increase participation.

Indexed as

Interactive voice response (IVR)mobile phone surveysnon-communicable disease (NCD)Uganda

Identifiers

PMID31620459
PMCPMC6789199
OpenAlexW2972564448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.