ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2023
Experiences in aligning WHO SMART guidelines to classification and terminology standards.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Guideline Uptake in Digital Ecosystems (GUIDE) study: protocol for implementation research on the impact of WHO SMART guidelines digital adaptation kits to improve quality of care.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Semantic enrichment of Pomeranian health study data using LOINC and WHO-FIC terminology mapping principles.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Integrating WHO's digital adaptation kit for antenatal care into BornFyne-PNMS: insights from Cameroon.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Modelling clinical narrative as computable knowledge: The NICE computable implementation guidance project.Learning health systems · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDigital adaptation kits (DAKs) distill WHO guidelines for digital use by representing them as workflows, data dictionaries and decision support tables. This paper aims to highlight key lessons learnt in coding data elements of the antenatal care (ANC) and family planning DAKs to standardised classifications and terminologies (CATs).
methodsWe encoded data elements within the ANC and family planning DAKs to standardised CATs from the WHO CATs and other freely available CATs.
resultsThe coding process demonstrated approaches to refine the data dictionaries and enhance alignment between data elements and CATs. DISCUSSION: Applying CATs to WHO clinical and public health guidelines can ensure that recommendations are operationalised in a digital system with appropriate consistency and clarity. This requires a multidisciplinary team and careful review to achieve conceptual equivalence between data elements and standardised terminologies.
conclusionThe systematic translation of guidelines into digital systems provides an opportunity for leveraging CATs; however, this approach needs further exploration into its implementation in country contexts and transition into machine-readable components.
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.