MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217504343 · doi:10.2196/22093

The Influence of Design and Implementation Characteristics on the Use of Maternal Mobile Health Interventions in Kenya: Systematic Literature Review

2021· review· en· W3217504343 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karen Sowon, Priscilla Maliwichi, Wallace Chigona

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionmHealthSystematic reviewMedicineComputer scienceMEDLINENursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The growth of mobile technology in developing countries, coupled with pressing maternal health care challenges, has led to a widespread implementation of maternal mobile health (mHealth) innovations. However, reviews generating insights on how the characteristics of the interventions influence use are scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review maternal mHealth interventions in Kenya to explore the influence of intervention design and implementation characteristics on use by maternal health clients. We also provide a starting inventory for maternal mHealth interventions in the country. METHODS: Using a systematic approach, we retrieved a total of 1100 citations from both peer-reviewed and gray sources. Articles were screened on the basis of an inclusion and exclusion criterion, and the results synthesized by categorizing and characterizing the interventions presented in the articles. The first phase of the literature search was conducted between January and April 2019, and the second phase was conducted between April and June 2021. RESULTS: A total of 16 articles were retrieved, comprising 13 maternal mHealth interventions. The study highlighted various mHealth design and implementation characteristics that may influence the use of these interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to elaborating on insights that would be useful in the design and implementation of future interventions, this study contributes to a local inventory of maternal mHealth interventions that may be useful to researchers and implementers in mHealth. This study highlights the need for explanatory studies to elucidate maternal mHealth use, while complementing existing evidence on mHealth effectiveness.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.176
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.176
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0130.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.339 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207