MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3199095104 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053871

Exploring digital health interventions to support community health workers in low-and-middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review protocol

2021· review· en· W3199095104 on OpenAlexaff
Anam Shahil Feroz, Komal Valliani, Hajra Khwaja, Sehrish Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychological interventionProtocol (science)Low and middle income countries2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPublic healthDigital healthSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Health careEnvironmental healthDeveloping countryNursingAlternative medicineEconomic growthVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has significantly affected community health workers' (CHWs) performance as they are expected to perform pandemic-related tasks along with routine essential healthcare services. A plausible way to optimise CHWs' functioning during this pandemic is to couple the efforts of CHWs with digital tools. So far, no systematic evidence is available on the use of digital health interventions to support CHWs in low-middle-income countries (LMICs) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The article describes a protocol for a scoping review of primary research studies that aim to map evidence on the use of unique digital health interventions to support CHWs during COVID-19 in LMICs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Our search strategy has been developed for the following four main electronic databases: Excerpta Medica Database, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Google Scholar and reference tracking will be used for supplementary searches. Each article will be screened against eligibility criteria by two independent researchers at the title and abstract and full-text level. The review will include studies that targeted digital health interventions at CHWs' level to provide support in delivering COVID-19-related and other essential healthcare services. A date limit of 31 December 2019 to the present date will be placed on the search and English language articles will be included. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required, as primary data will not be collected in this study. The results from our scoping review will provide valuable insight into the use of digital health interventions to optimise CHWs' functioning and will reveal current knowledge gaps in research. The results will be disseminated through journal publications and conference presentations.

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)0.067
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0670.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.014
Bibliometrics0.0180.013
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0110.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.012

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 head0.649
GPT teacher head0.650
Teacher spread0.001 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→