ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Natural Language Processing Technologies for Public Health in Africa: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. 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.
- Dialogues of delivery: a multilingual question-answer dataset for maternal healthcare in East African languages.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Review
- Rethinking preventive medicine education after COVID-19: bridging training gaps in public health practice.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Natural Language Processing Technologies for Public Health in Africa: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNatural language processing (NLP) has the potential to promote public health. However, applying these technologies in African health systems faces challenges, including limited digital and computational resources to support the continent's diverse languages and needs.
objectiveThis scoping review maps the evidence on NLP technologies for public health in Africa, addressing the following research questions: (1) What public health needs are being addressed by NLP technologies in Africa, and what unmet needs remain? (2) What factors influence the availability of public health NLP technologies across African countries and languages? (3) What stages of deployment have these technologies reached, and to what extent have they been integrated into health systems? (4) What measurable impact has these technologies had on public health outcomes, where such data are available? (5) What recommendations have been proposed to enhance the quality, cost, and accessibility of health-related NLP technologies in Africa?
methodsThis scoping review includes academic studies published between January 1, 2013, and October 3, 2024. A systematic search was conducted across databases, including MEDLINE via PubMed, ACL Anthology, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library, supplemented by gray literature searches. Data were extracted and the NLP technology functions were mapped to the World Health Organization's list of essential public health functions and the United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDGs). The extracted data were analyzed to identify trends, gaps, and areas for future research. This scoping review follows the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting guidelines, and its protocol is publicly available.
resultsOf 2186 citations screened, 54 studies were included. While existing NLP technologies support a subset of essential public health functions and SDGs, language coverage remains uneven, with limited support for widely spoken African languages, such as Kiswahili, Yoruba, Igbo, and Zulu, and no support for most of Africa's >2000 languages. Most technologies are in prototyping phases, with only one fully deployed chatbot addressing vaccine hesitancy. Evidence of measurable impact is limited, with 15% (8/54) studies attempting health-related evaluations and 4% (2/54) demonstrating positive public health outcomes, including improved participants' mood and increased vaccine intentions. Recommendations include expanding language coverage, targeting local health needs, enhancing trust, integrating solutions into health systems, and adopting participatory design approaches. The gray literature reveals industry- and nongovernmental organizations-led projects focused on deployable NLP applications. However, these projects tend to support only a few major languages and specific use cases, indicating a narrower scope than academic research.
conclusionsDespite growth in NLP research for public health, major gaps remain in deployment, linguistic inclusivity, and health outcome evaluation. Future research should prioritize cross-sectoral and needs-based approaches that engage local communities, align with African health systems, and incorporate rigorous evaluations to enhance public health outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-doi:10.1101/2024.07.02.24309815.
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.