ArticleGlobal health action2022
Comparison of a palm-based biometric solution with a name-based identification system in rural Bangladesh.
Article in Global health action, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A peer-2-peer electronic health record system streamlining healthcare delivery during short-term medical mission clinics.mHealth · 2026Article
- Long-Term Experiences of Health Care Providers Using Iris Scanning as an Identification Tool in a Vaccine Trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnique identifiers are not universal in low- and middle-income countries. Biometric solutions have the potential to augment existing name-based searches used for identification in these settings. This paper describes a comparison of the searching accuracy of a palm-based biometric solution with a name-based database.
objectiveTo compare the identification of individuals between a palm-based biometric solution to a name-based District Health Information Software 2 (DHIS2) Android application, in a low-resource setting.
methodsThe study was conducted in Chandpur district, Bangladesh. Trained data collectors enrolled 150 women of reproductive age into two android applications - i) a name-based DHIS2 application, and ii) a palm-based biometric solution - both run on tablets. One week after enrollment, a different research team member attempted to re-identify each enrolled woman using both systems. A single image or text-based name was used for searching at the time of re-identification. We interviewed data collectors at the end of the study.
resultsSignificantly more women were successfully identified on the first attempt with a palm-based biometric application (84%) compared with the name-based DHIS2 application (61%). The proportion of identifications that required three or more attempts was similar between name-based (7%, CI 3.7-12.3) and palm-based biometric system (5%, CI: 1.9-9.4). However, the total number of attempts needed was significantly lower with the palm-based solution (mean 1.2 vs. 1.5, p < 0.001). In a group discussion, data collectors reported that the palm-based biometric identification system was both accurate and easy to use.
conclusionA palm-based biometric identification system on mobile devices was found to be an easy-to-use and accurate technology for the unique identification of individuals compared to an existing name-based application. Our findings imply that palm-based biometrics on mobile devices may be the next step in establishing unique identifiers in remote and rural settings where they are currently absent.
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.