Development of a Digital Assistant to Support Teleconsultations Between Remote Physicians and Frontline Health Workers in India: User-Centered Design Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many low- and middle-income countries have adopted telemedicine programs that connect frontline health workers (FHWs) such as nurses, midwives, or community health workers in rural and remote areas with physicians in urban areas to deliver care to patients. By leveraging technology to reduce temporal, financial, and geographical barriers, these health worker-to-physician telemedicine programs have the potential to increase health care quality, expand the specialties available to patients, and reduce the time and cost required to deliver care. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify, validate, and prioritize unmet needs in the health care space of health worker-to-physician telemedicine programs and develop and refine a solution that addresses those needs. METHODS: We collected information regarding user needs through ethnographic research, direct observation, and semistructured interviews with 37 stakeholders (n=5, 14% physicians; n=1, 3% public health program manager; n=12, 32% community health workers; and n=19, 51% patients) at 2 telemedicine clinics in rural West Bengal, India. We used the Spiral-Iterative Innovation Model to design and develop a prototype solution to meet these needs. RESULTS: We identified 74 unmet needs through our immersion in health worker-to-physician telemedicine programs. We identified a critical unmet need that achieving optimal teleconsultations in low- and middle-income countries often requires shifting tasks such as history taking and physical examination from high-skilled remote physicians to FHWs. To meet this need, we developed a prototype digital assistant that would allow FHWs to assume some of the tasks carried out by remote clinicians. The user needs of multiple stakeholder groups (patients, FHWs, physicians, and health organizations) were incorporated into the design and features of the task-shifting tool. The final prototype was shared with the health workers, physicians, and public health program managers who expressed that the tool would be useful and valuable. CONCLUSIONS: The final prototype that was developed was released as an open-source digital public good and may improve the quality and efficiency of care delivery in health worker-to-physician telemedicine programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".