MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380485516 · doi:10.2196/44362

A Mobile Clinical Decision Support System for High-Risk Pregnant Women in Rural India (SMARThealth Pregnancy): Pilot Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4380485516 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Shobhana Nagraj, Stephen Kennedy, Vivekanand Jha, Robyn Norton, Lisa Hinton, Laurent Billot, Eldho Rajan, A Abdul, Anita Phalswal, Varun Arora, Devarsetty Praveen, Jane E. Hirst

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesPregnancyRandomized controlled trialCluster randomised controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Family medicineObstetricsMedical emergencyNursingGestationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women in India. Early identification is crucial to reducing deaths. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) carry independent risks for future CVD, and antenatal care is a window to screen and counsel high-risk women. In rural India, community health workers (CHWs) deliver antenatal and postnatal care. We developed a complex intervention (SMARThealth Pregnancy) involving mobile clinical decision support for CHWs and evaluated it in a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to co-design a theory-informed intervention for CHWs to screen, refer, and counsel pregnant women at high risk of future CVD in rural India and evaluate its feasibility and acceptability. METHODS: In phase 1, we used qualitative methods to explore community priorities for high-risk pregnant women in rural areas of 2 diverse states in India. In phase 2, informed by behavior change theory and human-centered design, we used these qualitative data to develop the intervention components and implementation strategies for SMARThealth Pregnancy in an iterative process with end users. In phase 3, using mixed methods, we evaluated the intervention in a cRCT with an embedded qualitative substudy across 4 primary health centres: 2 in Jhajjar district, Haryana, and 2 in Guntur district, Andhra Pradesh. RESULTS: SMARThealth Pregnancy embedded a total of 15 behavior change techniques and included (1) community awareness programs; (2) targeted training, including point-of-care blood pressure and hemoglobin measurement; and (3) mobile clinical decision support for CHWs to screen women in their homes. The intervention focused on 3 priority conditions: anemia, HDP, and GDM. The evaluation involved a total of 200 pregnant women, equally randomized to intervention or enhanced standard care (control). Recruitment was completed within 5 months, with minimal loss to follow-up (4/200, 2%) at 6 weeks postpartum. A total of 4 primary care doctors and 54 CHWs in the intervention clusters took part in the study. Fidelity to intervention practices was 100% prepandemic. Over half the study population was affected by moderate to severe anemia at baseline. The prevalence of HDP (2.5%) and GDM (2%) was low in our study population. Results suggest a possible improvement in mean hemoglobin (anemia) in the intervention group, although an adequately powered trial is needed. The model of home-based care was feasible and acceptable for pregnant or postpartum women and CHWs, who perceived improvements in quality of care, self-efficacy, and professional recognition. CONCLUSIONS: SMARThealth Pregnancy is an innovative model of home-based care for high-risk pregnant women during the transitions between antenatal and postnatal care and adult health services. The use of theory and co-design during intervention development facilitated acceptability of the intervention and implementation strategies. Our experience has informed the decision to initiate a larger-scale cRCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03968952; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03968952. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.3389/fgwh.2021.620759.

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)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.436 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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