MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416736614 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017303

Understanding health innovation adoption: a realist evaluation of pulse oximeter implementation in primary care for children under 5 in four West African countries

2025· article· en· W4416736614 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Louart, H. Baldé, Abdourahmane Coulibaly, Abdoua Elhadji Dagobi, Kadidiatou Kadio, Kessièdé Gildas Boris Hedible, Valériane Leroy, Émilie Robert, Valéry Ridde

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
FundersUnitaid
KeywordsReferralPrimary careSustainabilityPrimary health careHealth carePulse (music)Child healthPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Hypoxaemia is an important contributor to child mortality, particularly in low-resource settings where diagnostic tools are scarce. The Améliorer l'Identification des détresses Respiratoires chez l'Enfant project introduced pulse oximeters (POs) into 202 primary healthcare centres (PHCs) in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and Niger, integrating them into the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness guidelines. This initiative aimed to strengthen diagnostic capacities for identifying hypoxaemia and to improve care management for critically ill children under 5. This study examined how healthcare workers (HCWs) adopted POs and explored the contexts and mechanisms influencing their adoption. METHODS: We conducted a realist evaluation to analyse adoption patterns, focusing on interactions between the Intervention, Contexts, Actors, Mechanisms and Outcomes (ICAMO configurations). Data collection included 299 interviews with HCWs, patients' families and institutional actors, conducted in 16 selected PHCs, at the institutional level and in district hospitals, complemented by site observations. Analysis was performed using NVivo software, identifying ICAMO configurations as demi-regularities to explain variations in PO use and adoption. RESULTS: Training enabled HCWs to recognise the utility of POs, further motivating their use. Support-focused supervision fostered a sense of support, while control-focused approaches sometimes resulted in mechanical use driven by external pressure. In contexts of high workloads and children's agitation, difficulties in using POs were observed. In settings with limited diagnostic tools, POs increased HCWs' diagnostic confidence, encouraging adoption and improving decision-making. Observing or knowing the benefits of POs on children's health provided HCWs with a sense of relief and pride, further reinforcing PO adoption. However, structural barriers and challenges related to institutional adoption may threaten long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: This study sheds light on the contexts and mechanisms that influence the use and adoption of the PO in PHCs. While widely used by HCWs, addressing challenges related to training, supply chain logistics and referral systems to hospitals is essential to ensure long-term sustainability and improve child health outcomes.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207