MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224293058 · doi:10.1186/s12887-022-03282-6

Evaluation of community health worker's performance at home-based newborn assessment supported by mHealth in rural Bangladesh

2022· article· en· W4224293058 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Farjana Jahan, Eric M. Foote, Mahbubur Rahman, Abul Kasham Shoab, Sarker Masud Parvez, Mizanul Islam Nasim, Rezaul Hasan, Shams El Arifeen, Sk Masum Billah, Supta Sarker, Md Mahbubul Hoque, Muhammad Shariful Islam, Sabina Ashrafee, Gary L. Darmstadt

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pediatrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, BangladeshGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsMedicineReferralGold standard (test)mHealthVital signsFamily medicineHealth careCommunity health workersEmergency medicineMedical emergencyPediatricsNursingEnvironmental healthPopulationPsychological interventionHealth servicesSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In low to middle-income countries where home births are common and neonatal postnatal care is limited, community health worker (CHW) home visits can extend the capability of health systems to reach vulnerable newborns in the postnatal period. CHW assessment of newborn danger signs supported by mHealth have the potential to improve the quality of danger sign assessments and reduce CHW training requirements. We aim to estimate the validity (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value) of CHW assessment of newborn infants aided by mHealth compared to physician assessment. METHODS: In this prospective study, ten CHWs received five days of theoretical and hands-on training on the physical assessment of newborns including ten danger signs. CHWs assessed 273 newborn infants for danger signs within 48 h of birth and then consecutively for three days. A physician repeated 20% (n = 148) of the assessments conducted by CHWs. Both CHWs and the physician evaluated newborns for ten danger signs and decided on referral. We used the physician's danger sign identification and referral decision as the gold standard to validate CHWs' identification of danger signs and referral decisions. RESULTS: The referrals made by the CHWs had high sensitivity (93.3%), specificity (96.2%), and almost perfect agreement (K = 0.80) with the referrals made by the physician. CHW identification of all the danger signs except hypothermia showed moderate to high sensitivity (66.7-100%) compared to physician assessments. All the danger signs assessments except hypothermia showed moderate to high positive predictive value (PPV) (50-100%) and excellent negative predictive value (NPV) (99-100%). Specificity was high (99-100%) for all ten danger signs. CONCLUSION: CHW's identification of neonatal danger signs aided by mHealth showed moderate to high validity in comparison to physician assessments. mHealth platforms may reduce CHW training requirements and while maintaining quality CHW physical assessment performance extending the ability of health systems to provide neonatal postnatal care in low-resource communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03933423 , January 05, 2019.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PediatricsSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207