Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36962837›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

Feasibility, usability and acceptability of a novel digital hybrid-system for reporting of routine maternal health information in Southern Tanzania: A mixed-methods study.

Regine Unkels, Fatuma Manzi, Ntuli A Kapologwe, Ulrika Baker, Aziz Ahmad, Rustam Nabiev, Maria Berndtsson, Jitihada Baraka, Claudia Hanson, Atsumi Hirose

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Regine UnkelsDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6348-1620
Fatuma ManziHealth System, Policy and Economic Evaluations, Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Ntuli A KapologweHealth, Social Welfare & Nutrition Services, President's Office - Regional Administration and Local Government, Dodoma, Tanzania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0900-2937
Ulrika BakerUNICEF Tanzania Country Office, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Aziz AhmadHealth System, Policy and Economic Evaluations, Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1895-3072
Rustam NabievSHIFO Foundation, Stockholm, Sweden.
Maria BerndtssonSHIFO Foundation, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jitihada BarakaHealth System, Policy and Economic Evaluations, Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Claudia HansonDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Atsumi HiroseDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3967-5529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health information systems are important for health planning and progress monitoring. Still, data from health facilities are often of limited quality in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries. Quality deficits are partially rooted in the fact that paper-based documentation is still the norm at facility level, leading to mistakes in summarizing and manual copying. Digitization of data at facility level would allow automatization of these procedural steps. Here we aimed to evaluate the feasibility, usability and acceptability of a scanning innovation called Smart Paper Technology for digital data processing. We used a mixed-methods design to understand users' engagement with Smart Paper Technology and identify potential positive and negative effects of this innovation in three health facilities in Southern Tanzania. Eight focus group discussions and 11 in-depth interviews with users were conducted. We quantified time used by health care providers for documentation and patient care using time-motion methods. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data. Descriptive statistics and multivariable linear models were generated to compare the difference before and after introduction and adjust for confounders. Health care providers and health care managers appreciated the forms' simple design features and perceived Smart Paper Technology as time-saving and easy to use. The time-motion study with 273.3 and 224.0 hours of observations before and after introduction of Smart Paper Technology, respectively, confirmed that working time spent on documentation did not increase (27.0% at baseline and 26.4% post-introduction; adjusted p = 0.763). Time spent on patient care was not negatively impacted (26.9% at baseline and 37.1% at post-intervention; adjusted p = 0.001). Health care providers described positive effects on their accountability for data and service provision relating to the fact that individually signed forms were filled. Health care providers perceived Smart Paper Technology as feasible, easy to integrate and acceptable in their setting, particularly as it did not add time to documentation.

Identifiers

PMID36962837
PMCPMC10021923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read28
identifiers read6
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.