MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576239543 · doi:10.1093/heapol/czh001

The effect of Integrated Management of Childhood Illness on observed quality of care of under-fives in rural Tanzania

2003· article· en· W1576239543 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy and Planning · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPan American Health OrganizationInternational Development Research CentreWorld Health OrganizationBill and Melinda Gates FoundationUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsIntegrated Management of Childhood IllnessTanzaniaMedicineHealth facilityChild mortalityObservational studyEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionDeveloping countryProgram evaluationPopulationHealth careSocioeconomicsNursingEconomic growthPrimary health careHealth services

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) has been adopted by over 80 countries as a strategy for reducing child mortality and improving child health and development. It includes complementary interventions designed to address the major causes of child mortality at community, health facility, and health system levels. The Multi-Country Evaluation of IMCI Effectiveness, Cost and Impact (IMCI-MCE) is a global evaluation to determine the impact of IMCI on health outcomes and its cost-effectiveness. The MCE is coordinated by the Department of Child and Adolescent Health and Development of the World Health Organization. MCE studies are under way in Bangladesh, Brazil, Peru, Tanzania and Uganda. In Tanzania, the IMCI-MCE study uses a non-randomized observational design comparing four neighbouring districts, two of which have been implementing IMCI in conjunction with evidence-based planning and expenditure mapping at district level since 1997, and two of which began IMCI implementation in 2002. In these four districts, child health and child survival are documented at household level through cross-sectional, before-and-after surveys and through longitudinal demographic surveillance respectively. Here we present results of a survey conducted in August 2000 in stratified random samples of government health facilities to compare the quality of case-management and health systems support in IMCI and comparison districts. The results indicate that children in IMCI districts received better care than children in comparison districts: their health problems were more thoroughly assessed, they were more likely to be diagnosed and treated correctly as determined through a gold-standard re-examination, and the caretakers of the children were more likely to receive appropriate counselling and reported higher levels of knowledge about how to care for their sick children. There were few differences between IMCI and comparison districts in the level of health system support for child health services at facility level. This study suggests that IMCI, in the presence of a decentralized health system with practical health system planning tools, is feasible for implementation in resource-poor countries and can lead to rapid gains in the quality of case-management. IMCI is therefore likely to lead to rapid gains in child survival, health and development if adequate coverage levels can be achieved and maintained.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations199
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Policy and PlanningSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207