Assessing <i>Mbiotisho</i>: A smartphone application used to collect high‐frequency health and nutrition data from difficult‐to‐reach populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an urgent need for improved and timely health and nutrition data. We developed and tested a smartphone application that caregivers from a pastoral population used to measure, record and submit high-frequency and longitudinal health and nutrition information on themselves and their children. The data were assessed by comparing caregiver-submitted measurements of mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) to several benchmark data sets, including data collected by community health volunteers from the participating caregivers during the project period and data generated by interpreting photographs of MUAC measurements submitted by all participants. We found that the caregivers participated frequently and consistently over the 12-month period of the project; most of them made several measurements and submissions in at least 48 of the 52 weeks of the project. The evaluation of data quality was sensitive to which data set was used as the benchmark, but the results indicate that the errors in the caregivers' submissions were similar to that of enumerators in other studies. We then compare the costs of this alternative approach to data collection through more conventional methods, concluding that conventional methods can be more cost-effective for large socioeconomic surveys that value the breadth of the survey over the frequency of data, while the alternative we tested is favoured for those with objectives that are better met by high-frequency observations of a smaller number of well-defined outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".