ArticlePloS one2025
Exploring healthcare staff experiences with a hybrid paper/digital health management information system and their perspectives on digitalization as an alternative - A Tanzanian qualitative case study on perinatal data.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality health data is essential to improve delivery and outcomes of healthcare. This study explores the experiences of healthcare staff in Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, using a hybrid paper and digital Health Management Information System, and their perspectives on transitioning to a fully digital system. It aims to understand current practices of perinatal data collection and utilisation and gather recommendations regarding the possible introduction of a fully digital HMIS (DHMIS). A case study design was employed; individual semi-structured interviews were undertaken with staff from four professions directly involved in data generation and use (n = 29), working in a range of healthcare settings. Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 12 software; it identified findings under four major themes, along with a series of recommendations on the implementation of the DHMIS. We found that while in theory the hybrid paper and digital system facilitates standardised data management, in practice it presents inefficiencies in manual data entry leading to challenges with data accuracy, loss, retrieval, storage and flow. These challenges contribute to the strongly positive attitude among healthcare staff towards adopting a DHMIS which they believe would improve data accuracy, reduce workload, and enhance clinical and policy decision-making. To achieve a successful DHMIS, participants recommended effective training for all users. Additionally, they proposed an integrated system to avoid data redundancy. The importance of robust infrastructure to ensure sustainability, and of reliable internet and electricity supply, were also highlighted. In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the shortcomings of paper-based perinatal data recording, and the potential benefits and challenges of implementing a DHMIS in low-resource settings. It underscores the necessity of strategic planning, investment in infrastructure, and capacity building to achieve successful digital transformation in healthcare. The findings align with global health strategies promoting digitalisation to enhance health outcomes and support data-driven decision-making in healthcare systems.
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.