MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379383652 · doi:10.1186/s13031-023-00525-w

Assessment of the WHO non-communicable diseases kit for humanitarian emergencies in South Sudan: a retrospective, prospective, observational study

2023· article· en· W4379383652 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Hecham Alani, Laura Stephanie Miller, Bhavika Darji, Isaac Waweru, Aston B Atwiine, Marcello Tonelli, Joseph Lou K. Mogga, Ali Adams, Lilian Ndinda, Said Jongo, Lilian Kiapi

Bibliographic record

VenueConflict and Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of CalgaryWorld Health Organization
KeywordsSoftware deploymentHealth careObservational studyEnvironmental healthMedicineThematic analysisPublic healthHealth administrationBaseline (sea)Qualitative researchBusinessMedical emergencyNursingEngineeringEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The WHO Non-Communicable Diseases Kit (NCDK) was developed to support care for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in humanitarian settings. Targeting primary healthcare, each kit contains medicines and supplies that are forecasted to meet the needs of 10,000 people for 3 months. This study aimed to evaluate the NCDK deployment process, contents, usage and limitations, and to explore its acceptability and effectiveness among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Sudan. METHODS: This mixed-method observational study captured data from pre-and-post NCDK deployment. Six data collection tools included: (i) contextual analysis, (ii) semi-structured interviews, in addition to surveys measuring/assessing (iii) healthcare workers' knowledge about NCDs, and healthcare workers' perceptions of: (iv) health facility infrastructure, (v) pharmaceutical supply chain, and (vi) NCDK content. The pre- and post-deployment evaluations were conducted in four facilities (October-2019) and three facilities (April-2021), respectively. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data and content analysis for open-ended questions. A thematic analysis was applied on interviews findings and further categorized into four predetermined themes. RESULTS: Compared to baseline, two of the re-assessed facilities had improved service availability for NCDs. Respondents described NCDs as a growing problem that is not addressed at a national level. After deployment, the same struggles were intensified with the COVID-19 pandemic. The delivery process was slow and faced delays associated with several barriers. After deployment, poor communications and the "push system" of inventories were commonly perceived by stakeholders, leading to expiry/disposal of some contents. Despite being out-of-stock at baseline, at least 55% of medicines were found to be unused post-deployment and the knowledge surveys demonstrated a need for improving HCWs knowledge of NCDs. CONCLUSIONS: This assessment further confirmed the NCDK role in maintaining continuity of care on a short-term period. However, its effectiveness was dependent on the health system supply chain in place and the capacity of facilities to manage and treat NCDs. Availability of medicines from alternative sources made some of the NCDK medicines redundant or unnecessary for some health facilities. Several learnings were identified in this assessment, highlighting barriers that contributed to the kit underutilization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConflict and HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207