MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229082884 · doi:10.2196/32964

Remote Consulting in Primary Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Feasibility Study of an Online Training Program to Support Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4229082884 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A.P. Downie, Titus Mashanya, Beatrice Chipwaza, Frances Griffiths, Bronwyn Harris, Albino Kalolo, Sylvester Ndegese, Jackie Sturt, Nicole De Valliere, Senga Pemba

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsTanzaniaTrainerTelemedicineMedical educationHealth careDescriptive statisticsTraining (meteorology)MedicineNursingPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite acceleration of remote consulting throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, many health care professionals are practicing without training to offer teleconsultation to their patients. This is especially challenging in resource-poor countries, where the telephone has not previously been widely used for health care. OBJECTIVE: As the COVID-19 pandemic dawned, we designed a modular online training program for REmote Consulting in primary Health care (REaCH). To optimize upscaling of knowledge and skills, we employed a train-the-trainer approach, training health workers (tier 1) to cascade the training to others (tier 2) in their locality. We aimed to determine whether REaCH training was acceptable and feasible to health workers in rural Tanzania to support their health care delivery during the pandemic. METHODS: We developed and pretested the REaCH training program in July 2020 and created 8 key modules. The program was then taught remotely via Moodle and WhatsApp (Meta Platforms) to 12 tier 1 trainees and cascaded to 63 tier 2 trainees working in Tanzania's rural Ulanga District (August-September 2020). We evaluated the program using a survey (informed by Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation) to capture trainee satisfaction with REaCH, the knowledge gained, and perceived behavior change; qualitative interviews to explore training experiences and views of remote consulting; and documentary analysis of emails, WhatsApp texts, and training reports generated through the program. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Findings were triangulated and integrated during interpretation. RESULTS: Of the 12 tier 1 trainees enrolled in the program, all completed the training; however, 2 (17%) encountered internet difficulties and failed to complete the evaluation. In addition, 1 (8%) opted out of the cascading process. Of the 63 tier 2 trainees, 61 (97%) completed the cascaded training. Of the 10 (83%) tier 1 trainees who completed the survey, 9 (90%) would recommend the program to others, reported receiving relevant skills and applying their learning to their daily work, demonstrating satisfaction, learning, and perceived behavior change. In qualitative interviews, tier 1 and 2 trainees identified several barriers to implementation of remote consulting, including lacking digital infrastructure, few resources, inflexible billing and record-keeping systems, and limited community awareness. The costs of data or airtime emerged as the greatest immediate barrier to supporting both the upscaling of REaCH training and subsequently the delivery of safe and trustworthy remote health care. CONCLUSIONS: The REaCH training program is feasible, acceptable, and effective in changing trainees' behavior. However, government and organizational support is required to facilitate the expansion of the program and remote consulting in Tanzania and other low-resource settings.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207