Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32690005›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Applicability of the five case model to African eHealth investment decisions.

Sean C Broomhead, Maurice Mars, Richard E Scott, Tom Jones

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Appraising eHealth Investment for Africa: Scoping Review and Development of a Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  2. A New eHealth Investment Appraisal Framework for Africa: Validation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. EHealth Investment Appraisal in Africa: A Scoping Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    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.

Sean C BroomheadDepartment of TeleHealth, Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. sean.broomhead@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1904-4383
Maurice MarsDepartment of TeleHealth, Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Richard E ScottDepartment of TeleHealth, Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Tom JonesAfrican Centre for eHealth Excellence, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

Shared Distributed Learning for Developing Medical Informatics Capacity in AfricaD43TW007004 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL · PI MAHARAJ, MANOJ SEWAK, MARS, MAURICE · 2004 to 2013
$2.3M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW007004FIC NIH HHS D43TW007004-13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundeHealth programmes in African countries face fierce competition for scarce resources. Such initiatives should not proceed without adequate appraisal of their probable impacts, thereby acknowledging their opportunity costs and the need for appraisals to promote optimal use of available resources. However, since there is no broadly accepted eHealth impact appraisal framework available to provide guidance, and local expertise is limited, African health ministries have difficulty completing such appraisals. The Five Case Model, used in several countries outside Africa, has the potential to function as a decision-making tool in African eHealth environments and serve as a key component of an eHealth impact model for Africa.

methodsThis study identifies internationally recognised metrics and readily accessible data sources to assess the applicability of the model's five cases to African countries.

resultsTen metrics are identified that align with the Five Case Model's five cases, including nine component metrics and one summary metric that aggregates the nine. The metrics cover the eHealth environment, human capital and governance, technology development, and finance and economics. Fifty-four African countries are scored for each metric. Visualisation of the metric scores using spider charts reveals profiles of the countries' relative performance and provides an eHealth Investment Readiness Assessment Tool.

conclusionThe utility of these comparisons to strengthen eHealth investment planning suggests that the five cases are applicable to African countries' eHealth investment decisions. The potential for the Five Case Model to have a role in an eHealth impact appraisal framework for Africa should be validated through field testing.

Indexed as

AfricaDecision MakingHealth Care RationingHumansInvestmentsModels, OrganizationalOrganizational Case StudiesTelemedicineAfricaDeveloping countriesDigital healthEconomicseHealthImpactInvestment

Identifiers

PMID32690005
PMCPMC7370424

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.