MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039265079 · doi:10.1177/1833358320928729

Understanding the challenges associated with the use of data from routine health information systems in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

2020· review· en· W3039265079 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Information Management Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAXA Research Fund
KeywordsLow and middle income countriesPublishingData scienceInformation systemSystematic reviewHealth dataMEDLINEComputer scienceHealth careMedicineDeveloping countryPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Routine health information systems (RHISs) are crucial to informing decision-making at all levels of the health system. However, the use of RHIS data in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited due to concerns regarding quality, accuracy, timeliness, completeness and representativeness. OBJECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed technical, behavioural and organisational/environmental challenges that hinder the use of RHIS data in LMICs and strategies implemented to overcome these challenges. METHOD: Four electronic databases were searched for studies describing challenges associated with the use of RHIS data and/or strategies implemented to circumvent these challenges in LMICs. Identified articles were screened against inclusion and exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Sixty studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review, 55 of which described challenges in using RHIS data and 20 of which focused on strategies to address these challenges. Identified challenges and strategies were organised by their technical, behavioural and organisational/environmental determinants and by the core steps of the data process. Organisational/environmental challenges were the most commonly reported barriers to data use, while technical challenges were the most commonly addressed with strategies. CONCLUSION: Despite the known benefits of RHIS data for health system strengthening, numerous challenges continue to impede their use in practice. IMPLICATIONS: Additional research is needed to identify effective strategies for addressing the determinants of RHIS use, particularly given the disconnect identified between the type of challenge most commonly described in the literature and the type of challenge most commonly targeted for interventions.

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.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.432
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.011 · 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