Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40533075›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2025

Use of Technology to Support Health Care Providers Delivering Care in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Umbrella Review.

Adam Craig, Harriet Lawford, Maggie Miller, Liuyi Chen-Cao, Leanna Woods, Siaw-Teng Liaw, Myron Anthony Godinho

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Adam CraigOperational Research and Decision Support for Infectious Diseases Program, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9287-8755
Harriet LawfordOperational Research and Decision Support for Infectious Diseases Program, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9699-8201
Maggie MillerOperational Research and Decision Support for Infectious Diseases Program, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0866-1960
Liuyi Chen-CaoOperational Research and Decision Support for Infectious Diseases Program, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2405-3676
Leanna WoodsQueensland Digital Health Centre, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4811-4608
Siaw-Teng LiawSchool of Clinical Medicine and School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney, Randwick, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5989-3614
Myron Anthony GodinhoWestmead Applied Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0081-2506

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care providers are at the forefront of the digital health transformation underway in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). Digital health innovations (DHIs) promise more efficient and equitable health care delivery. However, their implementation often outpaces the generation of evidence supporting their effectiveness, resulting in fragmented projects that are poorly aligned with local system needs. Recognizing the diverse ways DHIs are used, the World Health Organization introduced a revised Classification of Digital Health Interventions in 2023 identifying 4 primary user groups, including health care providers.

objectiveThis study aims to synthesize the current evidence on the use and impact of DHIs by health care providers in LLMICs.

methodsWe conducted an umbrella review of articles published between 2010 and 2024. Articles were sourced through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy combined keywords with Boolean operators. To be included, articles had to be original research published as systematic, thematic, or scoping reviews and had to use a systematic process for data identification and extraction. They needed to relate to a DHI implemented in at least 1 LLMIC and be available in English. World Bank country classifications were used to define LLMICs. Data extracted were deductively coded and thematically analyzed according to the 11 health system functions outlined in the 2023 World Health Organization classification of DHIs.

resultsOverall, 88 reviews were included. Telemedicine was the most commonly studied DHI (60/88, 68%), with evidence suggesting that it has improved information sharing among providers (eg, hospitals and private providers) and enhanced delivery efficiency, particularly in limited-access settings. Outside of telemedicine, the evidence remains thin and uneven across other categories of DHIs. While DHIs appear to help providers interact more effectively with clients, systems, and one another, many interventions remain short lived, limited in scale, or contextually misaligned. The use of personal mobile devices by health care providers emerged as a common and practical platform for delivering DHIs, highlighting the potential for cost savings and rapid uptake. Persistent challenges such as insufficient infrastructure, high setup costs, and limited workforce capacity remain key barriers to sustainable scale-up.

conclusionsSome evidence suggests DHIs are transforming health care delivery in LLMICs and contributing to broader health goals; however, robust and conclusive evidence on DHIs' impact on health outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and long-term sustainability is lacking. Caution is warranted when introducing DHIs that may not align with underlying system constraints. Policy makers and development partners are encouraged to support implementation research to build a more coherent global evidence base. DHIs should be seen not as a stand-alone solution but as a complementary tool to strengthen health systems.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42024586285; www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024586285.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesHealth PersonnelHumansTelemedicinedevelopmentdigital healtheHealthprimary health careSustainable Development Goalsuniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID40533075
PMCPMC12223456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.