MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4399277555 · doi:10.2196/55959

The Information and Communication Technology Maturity Assessment at Primary Health Care Services Across 9 Provinces in Indonesia: Evaluation Study

2024· article· en· W4399277555 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dewi Nur Aisyah, Agus Heri Setiawan, Alfiano Fawwaz Lokopessy, Nadia Faradiba, Setiaji Setiaji, Logan Manikam, Zisis Kozlakidis

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueElectronic Health Records Systems
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesWorld Health Organization
Mots-clésMaturity (psychological)Information and Communications TechnologyHealth servicesPrimary health careMedicinePrimary careHealth information technologyHealth careHealth informationBusinessEnvironmental healthComputer scienceFamily medicineWorld Wide WebPsychologyPolitical sciencePopulation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Indonesia has rapidly embraced digital health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, with over 15 million daily health application users. To advance its digital health vision, the government is prioritizing the development of health data and application systems into an integrated health care technology ecosystem. This initiative involves all levels of health care, from primary to tertiary, across all provinces. In particular, it aims to enhance primary health care services (as the main interface with the general population) and contribute to Indonesia's digital health transformation. Objective: This study assesses the information and communication technology (ICT) maturity in Indonesian health care services to advance digital health initiatives. ICT maturity assessment tools, specifically designed for middle-income countries, were used to evaluate digital health capabilities in 9 provinces across 5 Indonesian islands. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from February to March 2022, in 9 provinces across Indonesia, representing the country's diverse conditions on its major islands. Respondents included staff from public health centers (Puskesmas), primary care clinics (Klinik Pratama), and district health offices (Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten/Kota). The survey used adapted ICT maturity assessment questionnaires, covering human resources, software and system, hardware, and infrastructure. It was administered electronically and involved 121 public health centers, 49 primary care clinics, and 67 IT staff from district health offices. Focus group discussions were held to delve deeper into the assessment results and gain more descriptive insights. Results: In this study, 237 participants represented 3 distinct categories: 121 public health centers, 67 district health offices, and 49 primary clinics. These instances were selected from a sample of 9 of the 34 provinces in Indonesia. Collected data from interviews and focus group discussions were transformed into scores on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating low ICT readiness and 5 indicating high ICT readiness. On average, the breakdown of ICT maturity scores was as follows: 2.71 for human resources' capability in ICT use and system management, 2.83 for software and information systems, 2.59 for hardware, and 2.84 for infrastructure, resulting in an overall average score of 2.74. According to the ICT maturity level pyramid, the ICT maturity of health care providers in Indonesia fell between the basic and good levels. The need to pursue best practices also emerged strongly. Further analysis of the ICT maturity scores, when examined by province, revealed regional variations. Conclusions: The maturity of ICT use is influenced by several critical components. Enhancing human resources, ensuring infrastructure, the availability of supportive hardware, and optimizing information systems are imperative to attain ICT maturity in health care services. In the context of ICT maturity assessment, significant score variations were observed across health care levels in the 9 provinces, underscoring the diversity in ICT readiness and the need for regionally customized follow-up actions.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,453
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,480
Écart entre enseignants0,457 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Medical InformaticsMême sujetElectronic Health Records SystemsTravaux en français237 207