ArticlePloS one2020
Using mHealth to improve health care delivery in India: A qualitative examination of the perspectives of community health workers and beneficiaries.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of mobile technology and utilization of maternal and neonatal healthcare in low and middle-income countries (LMICs): a systematic review.BMC women's health · 2023Pooled it
- Health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- The effect of electronic job aid assisted one-to-one counselling to support exclusive breastfeeding among 0-5-month-old infants in rural Bangladesh.Maternal & child nutrition · 2022Trial
- Effectiveness of WHO mhGAP-IG in identification and management of depression by primary level non-specialist health workers - protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial from India.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Differential acceptance of a national digital health platform among community and frontline health workers in Cote d'Ivoire: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Kademlia hash snow ablation resource optimized stride scheduling for mobile computing services in healthcare sector.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Understanding Health Care Workers' Attitudes and Preferences Toward Digital Patient Monitoring Platforms: Cross-Country Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Linking Household and Service Provisioning Assessments to Estimate a Metric of Effective Health Coverage: A Metric for Monitoring Universal Health Coverage.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Construction of the Digital Health Equity-Focused Implementation Research Conceptual Model - Bridging the Divide Between Equity-focused Digital Health and Implementation Research.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis of factors affecting mHealth adoption in India.Oxford open digital health · 2024Article
- Stress Alleviation Methods for community-Based Health ActiVists (SAMBHAV): Development of a digital program for stress reduction for community health workers in rural India.SSM. Mental health · 2023Article
- Digital Health Technologies for Maternal and Child Health in Africa and Other Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Cross-disciplinary Scoping Review With Stakeholder Consultation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Community Health Worker Use of Smart Devices for Health Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Does mHealth influence community health worker performance in vulnerable populations? A mixed methods study in a multinational refugee settlement in Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Design and Process of Implementation Mobile Application Based Modular Training on Early Detection of Cancers (M-OncoEd) for Primary Care Physicians in India.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Digital Solutions for Community and Primary Health Workers: Lessons From Implementations in Africa.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Review
- Sub-optimal knowledge with positive attitude and belief of frontline health workers toward the use of information technologies: A mixed-method study from rural Haryana, India.Journal of education and health promotion · 2022Article
- The supply is there. So why can't pregnant and breastfeeding women in rural India get the COVID-19 vaccine?PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessing costs of developing a digital program for training community health workers to deliver treatment for depression: A case study in rural India.Psychiatry research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundmHealth technologies are proliferating globally to address quality and timeliness of health care delivery by Community Health Workers (CHWs). This study aimed to examine CHW and beneficiaries' perceptions of a new mHealth intervention (Common Application Software [CAS] for CHWs in India. The objectives of the study were to seek perspectives of CHWs and beneficiaries on the uptake of CAS, changes in CHW-beneficiary interactions since the introduction of CAS and potential barriers faced by CHWs in use of CAS. Further, important contextual factors related to CHW-beneficiary interface and dynamics that may have a bearing on CAS have been described.
methodsA qualitative study was conducted in two states of India (Bihar and Madhya Pradesh) from March-April 2018 with CHWs (n = 32) and beneficiaries (n = 55). All interviews were conducted and recorded in Hindi, transcribed and translated into English, and coded and thematically analysed using Dedoose.
findingsThe mHealth intervention was acceptable to the CHWs who felt that CAS improved their status in the communities where they worked. Beneficiaries' views were a mix of positive and negative perceptions. The divergent views between CHWs and beneficiaries surrounding the use and impact of CAS highlight an underlying mistrust, socio-cultural barriers in engagement, and technological barriers in implementation. All these contextual factors can influence the perception and uptake of CAS.
conclusionsmHealth interventions targeting CHWs and beneficiaries have the potential to improve performance of CHWs, reduce barriers to information and potentially change the behaviors of beneficiaries. While technology is an enabler for CHWs to improve their service delivery, it does not necessarily help overcome social and cultural barriers that impede CHW-beneficiary interactions to bring about improvements in knowledge and health behaviors. Future interventions for CHWs including mHealth interventions should examine contextual factors along with the acceptability, accessibility, and usability by beneficiaries and community members.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.