Evaluation of the Western Cape Province Developmental Screening Programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluates the input, process and output parameters of the Western Cape Developmental Screening Programme in order to inform policy and practice regarding developmental screening in the province. The study describes the background, development and implementation of the screening programme and examines its current delivery, including the main enabling factors and barriers to implementation. In order to achieve the abovementioned objectives, a combination of predominantly qualitative and some quantitative data was gathered in stages from all levels of the health system (provincial, regional and district levels) using a number of different methods. In addition to documentary and literature reviews, information was gathered via structured interviews with key health managers at a provincial and regional level, a rapid facility survey and facility based assessments. Information gathered from interviews and focus groups was analysed thematically, while rapid facility survey results were analysed via Epilnfo. Despite numerous successes in its development and the overall awareness of the Developmental Screening Programme, developmental screening is not conducted uniformly across the province. Almost a quarter of primary health care facilities do not deliver any aspect of the programme and only one of nine facilities deliver according to protocol. This study concludes that despite the Developmental Screening Programme being a well-conceptualised and highly valued programme, its delivery has failed as a result of constraints within the broader health system. As previous evaluations of child health programmes have demonstrated, the overall transformation of the health system, organisation of service delivery at a primary health care level and gaps in human resource development and information systems impact significantly on the delivery of preventive service delivery for children. As official programmes for developmental screening are not conducted in any other provinces, the study results may also inform policy and practice on a national level.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".