Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34905975›Full record

ArticleInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing

EHealth Investment Appraisal in Africa: A Scoping Review.

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

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Appraising eHealth Investment for Africa: Scoping Review and Development of a Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  4. A New eHealth Investment Appraisal Framework for Africa: Validation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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, College of Health Sciences, 72753University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-1904-4383
Maurice MarsDepartment of TeleHealth, College of Health Sciences, 72753University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-8784-780X
Richard E ScottDepartment of TeleHealth, College of Health Sciences, 72753University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-9036-7070
Tom Jones72753African 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 TW007004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

eHealth is an opportunity cost, competing for limited available funds with other health priorities such as clinics, vaccinations, medicines and even salaries. As such, it should be appraised for probable impact prior to allocation of funds. This is especially pertinent as recognition grows for the role of eHealth in attaining Universal Health Coverage. Despite optimism about eHealth's potential role, in Africa there remain insufficient data and skills for adequate economic appraisals to select optimal investments from numerous competing initiatives. The aim of this review is to identify eHealth investment appraisal approaches and tools that have been used in African countries, describe their characteristics and make recommendations regarding African eHealth investment appraisal in the face of limited data and expertise. Methods: Literature on eHealth investment appraisals conducted in African countries and published between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2020 was reviewed. Selected papers' investment appraisal characteristics were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for economic evaluations and a newly developed Five-Case Model for Digital Health (FCM-DH) checklist for investment appraisal. 5 papers met inclusion criteria. Their assessments revealed important appraisal gaps. In particular, none of the papers addressed risk exposure, affordability, adjustment for optimism bias, clear delivery milestones, practical plans for implementation, change management or procurement, and only 1 paper described plans for building partnerships. Discussion: Using this insight, an extended 5-Case Model is proposed as the foundation of an African eHealth investment appraisal framework. This, combined with building local eHealth appraisal capabilities, may promote optimal eHealth investment decisions, strengthen implementations and improve the number and quality of related publications.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical PreparationsTelemedicineAfricaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansInvestmentsPharmaceutical PreparationsAfricaappraisalassessmentdeveloping countriesdigital healtheconomicseHealthimpactinvestment

Identifiers

PMID34905975
PMCPMC8679012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.