Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40636986›Full record

ArticleTropical medicine & international health : TM & IH2025

Interactive voice response surveys as a method for increasing the representativeness of rural respondents in a mortality mobile phone survey: Findings from Malawi.

Malebogo Tlhajoane, Funny Muthema, Michael Chasukwa, Kelly McCain, Shammi Luhar, Julio Romero Prieto, Jacob Saikolo, Cremildo Manhica, Sarah Walters, Boniface Dulani and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors.

Malebogo TlhajoaneDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Funny MuthemaInstitute of Public Opinion and Research, Zomba, Malawi.
Michael ChasukwaInstitute of Public Opinion and Research, Zomba, Malawi.
Kelly McCainDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Shammi LuharDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Julio Romero PrietoDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jacob SaikoloInstitute of Public Opinion and Research, Zomba, Malawi.
Cremildo ManhicaDepartment of Survey and Health Observation, National Institute of Health, Maputo, Mozambique.
Sarah WaltersDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Boniface DulaniInstitute of Public Opinion and Research, Zomba, Malawi.
Georges ReniersDepartment of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOur study aims to (i) evaluate the yield and costs of a fully automated interactive voice response survey as a screening tool for identifying rural respondents for participation in a mortality mobile phone survey, and (ii) compare mortality survey call outcomes among interactive voice response pre-screened and unscreened numbers.

methodsIn order to identify respondents living in rural areas, a short interactive voice response survey was conducted among 24,924 unique mobile phone numbers to determine place of residence (Rural vs. Other). We calculated the proportion of rural numbers derived from the interactive voice response survey among all numbers dialled. Mobile phone numbers screened with interactive voice response were then combined with those generated via random digit dialling and used in a national mortality mobile phone survey in Malawi. Final dispositions for each mobile number dialled were compared for both groups by testing the difference in proportions.

resultsApproximately half of all phone numbers dialled in the interactive voice response survey were answered, and among them, 33.9% indicated that they lived in a rural area. The cost per completed interactive voice response was US$8.75 and just under half of the numbers screened by interactive voice response later resulted in a completed mortality mobile phone survey, at a cost of US$17.4 per completed mortality survey. In comparison, less than a quarter of the numbers that were not screened through interactive voice response resulted in a completed mortality survey (45.3% vs. 22.3%, p <0.001). On average, 12 call attempts were required to complete a mortality survey interview in the unscreened group, compared to 6.3 call attempts among the interactive voice response pre-screened numbers.

conclusionsInteractive voice response surveys can be used to increase the representation of rural respondents in mobile phone surveys at an acceptable cost. Modifications to the interactive voice response survey process (e.g., survey timing and number of call attempts) should be explored further to increase engagement.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneMortalityRural PopulationAdultFemaleHumansMalawiMaleMiddle Agedinteractive voice responsemobile technologyrural populationssurvey sampling

Identifiers

PMID40636986
PMCPMC12401643

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.