Development and Implementation of Digital Diagnostic Algorithms for Neonatal Units in Zimbabwe and Malawi: Development and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite an increase in hospital-based deliveries, neonatal mortality remains high in low-resource settings. Due to limited laboratory diagnostics, there is significant reliance on clinical findings to inform diagnoses. Accurate, evidence-based identification and management of neonatal conditions could improve outcomes by standardizing care. This could be achieved through digital clinical decision support (CDS) tools. Neotree is a digital, quality improvement platform that incorporates CDS, aiming to improve neonatal care in low-resource health care facilities. Before this study, first-phase CDS development included developing and implementing neonatal resuscitation algorithms, creating initial versions of CDS to address a range of neonatal conditions, and a Delphi study to review key algorithms. OBJECTIVE: This second-phase study aims to codevelop and implement neonatal digital CDS algorithms in Malawi and Zimbabwe. METHODS: Overall, 11 diagnosis-specific web-based workshops with Zimbabwean, Malawian, and UK neonatal experts were conducted (August 2021 to April 2022) encompassing the following: (1) review of available evidence, (2) review of country-specific guidelines (Essential Medicines List and Standard Treatment Guidelinesfor Zimbabwe and Care of the Infant and Newborn, Malawi), and (3) identification of uncertainties within the literature for future studies. After agreement of clinical content, the algorithms were programmed into a test script, tested with the respective hospital's health care professionals (HCPs), and refined according to their feedback. Once finalized, the algorithms were programmed into the Neotree software and implemented at the tertiary-level implementation sites: Sally Mugabe Central Hospital in Zimbabwe and Kamuzu Central Hospital in Malawi, in December 2021 and May 2022, respectively. In Zimbabwe, usability was evaluated through 2 usability workshops and usability questionnaires: Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) and System Usability Scale (SUS). RESULTS: Overall, 11 evidence-based diagnostic and management algorithms were tailored to local resource availability. These refined algorithms were then integrated into Neotree. Where national management guidelines differed, country-specific guidelines were created. In total, 9 HCPs attended the usability workshops and completed the SUS, among whom 8 (89%) completed the PSSUQ. Both usability scores (SUS mean score 75.8 out of 100 [higher score is better]; PSSUQ overall score 2.28 out of 7 [lower score is better]) demonstrated high usability of the CDS function but highlighted issues around technical complexity, which continue to be addressed iteratively. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the successful development and implementation of the only known neonatal CDS system, incorporated within a bedside data capture system with the ability to deliver up-to-date management guidelines, tailored to local resource availability. This study highlighted the importance of collaborative participatory design. Further implementation evaluation is planned to guide and inform the development of health system and program strategies to support newborn HCPs, with the ultimate goal of reducing preventable neonatal morbidity and mortality in 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 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 | 0.025 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".