Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407438›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2021

Mapping evidence of mobile health technologies for disease diagnosis and treatment support by health workers in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Ernest Osei, Desmond Kuupiel, Portia Nelisiwe Vezi, Tivani P Mashamba-Thompson

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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.

Ernest OseiSecond Floor of George Campbell Building, Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College Campus, Durban, 4001, South Africa. ernestosei56@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8536-545X
Desmond KuupielSecond Floor of George Campbell Building, Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College Campus, Durban, 4001, South Africa.
Portia Nelisiwe VeziSecond Floor of George Campbell Building, Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College Campus, Durban, 4001, South Africa.
Tivani P Mashamba-ThompsonSecond Floor of George Campbell Building, Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College Campus, Durban, 4001, South Africa.
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZAUniversity of Pretoria · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe rapid growth of mobile technology has given rise to the development of mobile health (mHealth) applications aimed at treating and preventing a wide range of health conditions. However, evidence on the use of mHealth in high disease burdened settings such as sub-Sharan Africa is not clear. Given this, we systematically mapped evidence on mHealth for disease diagnosis and treatment support by health workers in sub-Saharan Africa.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review study guided by the Arksey and O'Malley's framework, Levac et al. recommendations, and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. We thoroughly searched the following databases: MEDLINE and CINAHL with full text via EBSCOhost; PubMed; Science Direct and Google Scholar for relevant articles from the inception of mHealth technology to April 2020. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full-text articles using the eligibility criteria as reference. This study employed the mixed methods appraisal tool version 2018 to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

resultsOut of the 798 articles identified, only 12 published articles presented evidence on the availability and use of mHealth for disease diagnosis and treatment support by health workers in SSA since 2010. Of the 12 studies, four studies were conducted in Kenya; two in Malawi; two in Nigeria; one in South Africa; one in Zimbabwe; one in Mozambique, and one in Lesotho. Out of the 12 studies, one reported the use of mHealth for diseases diagnosis; three reported the use of mHealth to manage HIV; two on the management of HIV/TB; two on the treatment of malaria; one each on the management of hypertension; cervical cancer; and three were not specific on any disease condition. All the 12 included studies underwent methodological quality appraisal with a scored between 70 and 100%.

conclusionsThe study shows that there is limited research on the availability and use of mHealth by health workers for disease diagnosis and treatment support in sub-Saharan Africa. We, therefore, recommend primary studies focusing on the use of mHealth by health workers for disease diagnosis and treatment support in sub-Saharan Africa.

Indexed as

TelemedicineFemaleHumansKenyaMalawiNigeriaSouth AfricaTechnologyDiagnostic accuracyDisease diagnosisDisease screeningHealth workersmHealth applicationsmHealth appsmHealth technologiesMobile healthSub-Saharan AfricaTherapeutic proceduresTreatment support

Identifiers

PMID33407438
PMCPMC7789784
OpenAlexW3119038771

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.