MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399277555 · doi:10.2196/55959

The Information and Communication Technology Maturity Assessment at Primary Health Care Services Across 9 Provinces in Indonesia: Evaluation Study

2024· article· en· W4399277555 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dewi Nur Aisyah, Agus Heri Setiawan, Alfiano Fawwaz Lokopessy, Nadia Faradiba, Setiaji Setiaji, Logan Manikam, Zisis Kozlakidis

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Information and Communications TechnologyHealth servicesPrimary health careMedicinePrimary careHealth information technologyHealth careHealth informationBusinessEnvironmental healthComputer scienceFamily medicineWorld Wide WebPsychologyPolitical sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Indonesia has rapidly embraced digital health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, with over 15 million daily health application users. To advance its digital health vision, the government is prioritizing the development of health data and application systems into an integrated health care technology ecosystem. This initiative involves all levels of health care, from primary to tertiary, across all provinces. In particular, it aims to enhance primary health care services (as the main interface with the general population) and contribute to Indonesia's digital health transformation. Objective: This study assesses the information and communication technology (ICT) maturity in Indonesian health care services to advance digital health initiatives. ICT maturity assessment tools, specifically designed for middle-income countries, were used to evaluate digital health capabilities in 9 provinces across 5 Indonesian islands. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from February to March 2022, in 9 provinces across Indonesia, representing the country's diverse conditions on its major islands. Respondents included staff from public health centers (Puskesmas), primary care clinics (Klinik Pratama), and district health offices (Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten/Kota). The survey used adapted ICT maturity assessment questionnaires, covering human resources, software and system, hardware, and infrastructure. It was administered electronically and involved 121 public health centers, 49 primary care clinics, and 67 IT staff from district health offices. Focus group discussions were held to delve deeper into the assessment results and gain more descriptive insights. Results: In this study, 237 participants represented 3 distinct categories: 121 public health centers, 67 district health offices, and 49 primary clinics. These instances were selected from a sample of 9 of the 34 provinces in Indonesia. Collected data from interviews and focus group discussions were transformed into scores on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating low ICT readiness and 5 indicating high ICT readiness. On average, the breakdown of ICT maturity scores was as follows: 2.71 for human resources' capability in ICT use and system management, 2.83 for software and information systems, 2.59 for hardware, and 2.84 for infrastructure, resulting in an overall average score of 2.74. According to the ICT maturity level pyramid, the ICT maturity of health care providers in Indonesia fell between the basic and good levels. The need to pursue best practices also emerged strongly. Further analysis of the ICT maturity scores, when examined by province, revealed regional variations. Conclusions: The maturity of ICT use is influenced by several critical components. Enhancing human resources, ensuring infrastructure, the availability of supportive hardware, and optimizing information systems are imperative to attain ICT maturity in health care services. In the context of ICT maturity assessment, significant score variations were observed across health care levels in the 9 provinces, underscoring the diversity in ICT readiness and the need for regionally customized follow-up actions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.457 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207