↓ Skip to main content

Can smartphones and tablets improve the management of childhood illness in Tanzania? A qualitative study from a primary health care worker’s perspective

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can smartphones and tablets improve the management of childhood illness in Tanzania? A qualitative study from a primary health care worker’s perspective
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0805-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amani Flexson Shao, Clotilde Rambaud-Althaus, Ndeniria Swai, Judith Kahama-Maro, Blaise Genton, Valerie D’Acremont, Constanze Pfeiffer

Abstract

The impact of the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) strategy has been less than anticipated because of poor uptake. Electronic algorithms have the potential to improve quality of health care in children. However, feasibility studies about the use of electronic protocols on mobile devices over time are limited. This study investigated constraining as well as facilitating factors that influence the uptake of a new electronic Algorithm for Management of Childhood Illness (ALMANACH) among primary health workers in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. A qualitative approach was applied using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with altogether 40 primary health care workers from 6 public primary health facilities in the three municipalities of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Health worker's perceptions related to factors facilitating or constraining the uptake of the electronic ALMANACH were identified. In general, the ALMANACH was assessed positively. The majority of the respondents felt comfortable to use the devices and stated that patient's trust was not affected. Most health workers said that the ALMANACH simplified their work, reduced antibiotic prescription and gave correct classification and treatment for common causes of childhood illnesses. Few HWs reported technical challenges using the devices and complained about having had difficulties in typing. Majority of the respondents stated that the devices increased the consultation duration compared to routine practice. In addition, health system barriers such as lack of staff, lack of medicine and lack of financial motivation were identified as key reasons for the low uptake of the devices. The ALMANACH built on electronic devices was perceived to be a powerful and useful tool. However, health system challenges influenced the uptake of the devices in the selected health facilities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 152 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 22%
Researcher 26 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Postgraduate 15 9%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 17 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 13%
Social Sciences 20 13%
Computer Science 10 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 5%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 22 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,346,792
of 19,211,930 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,583
of 6,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,443
of 235,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,211,930 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 235,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them