MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401015891 · doi:10.2196/50375

Maturity Assessment of District Health Information System Version 2 Implementation in Ethiopia: Current Status and Improvement Pathways

2024· article· en· W4401015891 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tesfahun Melese Yilma, Asefa Adimasu Taddese, Adane Mamuye, Berhanu Fikadie Endehabtu, Yibeltal Kiflie Alemayehu, Asaye Birhanu Senay, Dawit Wolde Daka, Loko Abraham, Rabeal Tadesse, Gemechis Melkamu, Naod Wendrad, Oli Kaba, Mesoud Mohammed, Wubshet Denboba, Dawit Birhan, Amanuel Biru, Binyam Tilahun

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Current (fluid)Computer scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although Ethiopia has made remarkable progress in the uptake of the District Health Information System version 2 (DHIS2) for national aggregate data reporting, there has been no comprehensive assessment of the maturity level of the system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the maturity level of DHIS2 implementation in Ethiopia and propose a road map that could guide the progress toward a higher level of maturity. We also aim to assess the current maturity status, implementation gaps, and future directions of DHIS2 implementation in Ethiopia. The assessment focused on digital health system governance, skilled human resources, information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, interoperability, and data quality and use. METHODS: A collaborative assessment was conducted with the engagement of key stakeholders through consultative workshops using the Stages of Continuous Improvement tool to measure maturity levels in 5 core domains, 13 components, and 39 subcomponents. A 5-point scale (1=emerging, 2=repeatable, 3=defined, 4=managed, and 5=optimized) was used to measure the DHIS2 implementation maturity level. RESULTS: The national DHIS2 implementation's maturity level is currently at the defined stage (score=2.81) and planned to move to the manageable stage (score=4.09) by 2025. The domain-wise maturity score indicated that except for ICT infrastructure, which is at the repeatable stage (score=2.14), the remaining 4 domains are at the defined stage (score=3). The development of a standardized and basic DHIS2 process at the national level, the development of a 10-year strategic plan to guide the implementation of digital health systems including DHIS2, and the presence of the required competencies at the facility level to accomplish specific DHIS2-related tasks are the major strength of the Ministry of Health of Ethiopia so far. The lack of workforce competency guidelines to support the implementation of DHIS2; the unavailability of core competencies (knowledge, skills, and abilities) required to accomplish DHIS2 tasks at all levels of the health system; and ICT infrastructures such as communication network and internet connectivity at the district, zonal, and regional levels are the major hindrances to effective DHIS2 implementation in the country. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the Stages of Continuous Improvement maturity model toolkit, the implementation status of DHIS2 in Ethiopia is at the defined stage, with the ICT infrastructure domain being at the lowest stage as compared to the other 4 domains. By 2025, the maturity status is planned to move from the defined stage to the managed stage by improving the identified gaps. Various action points are suggested to address the identified gaps and reach the stated maturity level. The responsible body, necessary resources, and methods of verification required to reach the specified maturity level are also listed.

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)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.427 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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