Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32505209›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Utilization of the national cluster of district health information system for health service decision-making at the district, sub-district and community levels in selected districts of the Brong Ahafo region in Ghana.

Eliezer Ofori Odei-Lartey, Rebecca Kyerewaa Dwommoh Prah, Edward Apraku Anane, Harry Danwonno, Stephaney Gyaase, Felix Boakye Oppong, Godwin Afenyadu, Kwaku Poku Asante

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Routine use of DHIS2 data: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Eliezer Ofori Odei-LarteyKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana. eliezer.lartey@kintampo-hrc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2074-9161
Rebecca Kyerewaa Dwommoh PrahKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.
Edward Apraku AnaneKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.
Harry DanwonnoKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.
Stephaney GyaaseKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.
Felix Boakye OppongKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.
Godwin AfenyaduUSAID/Ghana Evaluation for Health, Accra, Ghana.
Kwaku Poku AsanteKintampo Health Research Centre, P. O. Box 200, Kintampo, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing interest in the use of reliable evidence for health decision-making among low-and middle-income countries. Ghana has deployed DHIMS2 to replace the previously existing manual data harmonization processes.

methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in 12 districts comprising 12 district directorates, 10 district hospitals, 29 sub-district health centers, and 38 community health facilities in the Brong-Ahafo Region. Data collection tools were developed based on the Measure Evaluate assessment tools designed for evaluating the performance of routine information systems management tools. Utilization was assessed based on documented evidence and data was analyzed using STATA version 14.

resultsAlthough 93% of the health facilities studied submitted data unto the DHIMS2 platform, evidence suggested low use of this data in decision-making, particularly at the community level facilities where only 26% of the facilities used data from DHIMS2 to inform annual action plans and even less than 20% examined findings and issued directives for action. At the district level, 58% issued directives based on DHIMS2 information, 50% used DHIMS2 information for Advocacy purposes and 58% gave feedback reports based on DHIMS2 data for action. Functional computers were lacking across all facilities.

conclusionsActivities relating to the use of DHIMS2 information skew towards data quality checking with less focus on examining findings, making comparisons, and taking action-based decisions from findings and comparisons. Improving factors like internet access, availability of functional ICTs, frequency of supervisory visits, staff training and the provision of training manuals may facilitate the use of DHIMS2 in decision-making at all levels of the district health system.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesDecision Support Systems, ClinicalHealth Information SystemsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGhanaHumansMaleCHPSCommunity-levelDecision-makingdhis2District-levelEvidence-basedGhanaUtilization

Identifiers

PMID32505209
PMCPMC7275484

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.