Evaluation of the Med Safety mobile app for reporting adverse events in Burkina Faso
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Smartphone applications (apps) for pharmacovigilance present an opportunity for integration as cost-effective healthcare service intervention into basic healthcare services in low-resource settings. This study aimed to (i) evaluate the implementation of the Med Safety app in Burkina Faso, and (ii) compare the characteristics of the reports sent by the Med Safety app with those sent on paper form. The study had two components: (i) a cross-sectional online survey assessing the Med Safety app, and (ii) a retrospective analysis comparing the characteristics of the Med Safety reports with those of the paper form, received by the National Pharmacovigilance Centre of Burkina Faso (CNVPS), from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022. We evaluated the success of the implementation of the Med Safety intervention using measures of acceptability, usefulness and feasibility. This assessment involved a set of 14 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale. Acceptability, feasibility, and usefulness were determined based on achieving a total score higher than the mean. Subsequently, we computed the proportion of participants whose overall score for all items exceeded the mean. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the Chi2 test, respectively. The significance level of the statistical test was set at 5%. The survey participation rate was 51.9% (160/308). Half of the respondents were in the 35-44 age group (50.6%), and participants were predominantly male (71.9%). The Med Safety app was acceptable, feasible, and useful to 58.1% of respondents. The most useful features of the app were “reporting” (53.1%), “news” (13.6%) and “watch list” (12.4%). During the period, a total of 1,472 reports were received, including 357 (24.3%) through Med Safety and 1,115 (75.7%) through the paper form. The reports of adverse events following immunization received at the CNVPS numbered 974 (66.2%), these were related to COVID-19 vaccines, with 256 (26.3%) through the Med Safety and 718 (73.7%) through the paper form. The median time to submit the reports to the CNVPS was 159 (IQR 59–187) days for the Med Safety and 166 (IQR 107–281) days for the paper form (p < 0.001). In Burkina Faso, the Med Safety was found to be acceptable, useful, and feasible by users surveyed. In addition, and compared to the paper form, the app reduces the time to submit a report, and with increase in use, the reporting timeframe could be further improved.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».