MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965749773 · doi:10.2196/13653

eRegTime, Efficiency of Health Information Management Using an Electronic Registry for Maternal and Child Health: Protocol for a Time-Motion Study in a Cluster Randomized Trial

2019· article· en· W2965749773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marie Hella Lindberg, Mahima Venkateswaran, Khadija Abu Khader, Tamara Awwad, Buthaina Ghanem, Taghreed Hijaz, Kjersti Mørkrid, J. Frederik Frøen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health, University of BergenNorges ForskningsrådUniversitetet i OsloUniversitetet i BergenWorld Health Organization
KeywordsCluster randomised controlled trialMedicineHealth careRandomized controlled trialClinical decision support systemGuidelineFamily medicinePsychological interventionObservational studyDigital healthNursingDecision support systemData miningComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Paper-based routine health information systems often require repetitive data entry. In the West Bank, the primary health care system for maternal and child health was entirely paper-based, with care providers spending considerable amounts of time maintaining multiple files and client registers. As part of the phased national implementation of an electronic health information system, some of the primary health care clinics are now using an electronic registry (eRegistry) for maternal and child health. The eRegistry consists of client-level data entered by care providers at the point-of-care and supports several digital health interventions that are triggered by the documented clinical data, including guideline-based clinical decision support and automated public health reports. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the eRegTime study is to investigate whether the use of the eRegistry leads to changes in time-efficiency in health information management by the care providers, compared with the paper-based systems. METHODS: This is a substudy in a cluster randomized controlled trial (the eRegQual study) and uses the time-motion observational study design. The primary outcome is the time spent on health information management for antenatal care, informed and defined by workflow mapping in the clinics. We performed sample size estimations to enable the detection of a 25% change in time-efficiency with a 90% power using an intracluster correlation coefficient of 0.1 and an alpha of .05. We observed care providers for full workdays in 24 randomly selected primary health care clinics-12 using the eRegistry and 12 still using paper. Linear mixed effects models will be used to compare the time spent on health information management per client per care provider. RESULTS: Although the objective of the eRegQual study is to assess the effectiveness of the eRegistry in improving quality of antenatal care, the results of the eRegTime study will contribute to process evaluation, supplementing the findings of the larger trial. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic health tools are expected to reduce workload for the care providers and thus improve efficiency of clinical work. To achieve these benefits, the implementation of such systems requires both integration with existing workflows and the creation of new workflows. Studies assessing the time-efficiency of electronic health information systems can inform policy decisions for implementations in resource-limited low- and middle-income settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13653.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.084
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0840.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.010
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.008

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.613
Teacher spread0.415 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207