MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390660755 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002328

Evaluation of a comprehensive health check offered to frontline health workers in Zimbabwe

2024· article· en· W4390660755 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Edson Marambire, Rudo Chingono, Claire Calderwood, Leyla Larsson, Sibusisiwe Sibanda, Fungai Kavenga, Farirai P Nzvere, Ioana D. Olaru, Victoria Simms, Grace McHugh, Tsitsi Bandason, Nicol Redzo, Celia L. Gregson, Aspect J.V. Maunganidze, Christopher Pasi, Michael Chiwanga, Prosper Chonzi, Chiratidzo E. Ndhlovu, Hilda Mujuru, Simbarashe Rusakaniko, Rashida A. Ferrand, Katharina Kranzer

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilElizabeth Blackwell Institute for Health Research, University of BristolForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeEuropean CommissionUniversity of BristolGovernment of the United KingdomGovernment of CanadaEuropean and Developing Countries Clinical Trials PartnershipWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineHealth careNursingPublic healthMental healthPandemicCoping (psychology)Environmental healthFamily medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatryDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health workers are essential for a functioning healthcare system, and their own health is often not addressed. During the COVID-19 pandemic health workers were at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection whilst coping with increased healthcare demand. Here we report the development, implementation, and uptake of an integrated health check combining SARS-CoV-2 testing with screening for other communicable and non-communicable diseases for health workers in Zimbabwe during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health checks were offered to health workers in public and private health facilities from July 2020 to June 2022. Data on the number of health workers accessing the service and yield of screening was collected. Workshops and in-depth interviews were conducted to explore the perceptions and experiences of clients and service providers. 6598 health workers across 48 health facilities accessed the service. Among those reached, 5215 (79%) were women, the median age was 37 (IQR: 29-44) years and the largest proportion were nurses (n = 2092, 32%). 149 (2.3%) healthcare workers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Uptake of screening services was almost 100% for all screened conditions except HIV. The most common conditions detected through screening were elevated blood pressure (n = 1249; 19%), elevated HbA1c (n = 428; 7.7%) and common mental disorder (n = 645; 9.8%). Process evaluation showed high acceptability of the service. Key enablers for health workers accessing the service included free and comprehensive service provision, and availability of reliable point-of-care screening methods. Implementation of a comprehensive health check for health workers was feasible, acceptable, and effective, even during a pandemic. Conventional occupational health programmes focus on infectious diseases. In a society where even health workers cannot afford health care, free comprehensive occupational health services may address unmet needs in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment for chronic non-communicable conditions.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207