The Development of an Electronic Medical Record System to Improve Quality of Care for Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes in Rwanda: Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic medical record (EMR) systems have the potential to improve the quality of care and clinical outcomes for individuals with chronic and complex diseases. However, studies on the development and use of EMR systems for type 1 (T1) diabetes management in sub-Saharan Africa are few. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to analyze the need for improvements in the care processes that can be facilitated by an EMR system and to develop an EMR system for increasing quality of care and clinical outcomes for individuals with T1 diabetes in Rwanda. METHODS: A qualitative, cocreative, and multidisciplinary approach involving local stakeholders, guided by the framework for complex public health interventions, was applied. Participant observation and the patient's personal experiences were used as case studies to understand the clinical care context. A focus group discussion and workshops were conducted to define the features and content of an EMR. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The identified themes related to feature requirements were (1) ease of use, (2) automatic report preparation, (3) clinical decision support tool, (4) data validity, (5) patient follow-up, (6) data protection, and (7) training. The identified themes related to content requirements were (1) treatment regimen, (2) mental health, and (3) socioeconomic and demographic conditions. A theory of change was developed based on the defined feature and content requirements to demonstrate how these requirements could strengthen the quality of care and improve clinical outcomes for people with T1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The EMR system, including its functionalities and content, can be developed through an inclusive and cocreative process, which improves the design phase of the EMR. The development process of the EMR system is replicable, but the solution needs to be customized to the local context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".