Perceptions of data processes in mobile-based versus paper-based health information systems for maternal, newborn and child health: a qualitative study in Andhra Pradesh, India
Abstract
Background: Many maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) programmes have paired community health workers with mobile technologies to strengthen the ability of health information systems (HIS) to track women and children across time and beyond the clinical setting. However, little is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of using mobile technologies to enhance HIS data in resource-poor settings. Methods: Focus group discussions were conducted with community health workers called Health Activists (HAs; n=30), Community Organisation Leaders (n=28), HA Trainers (n=21), district and tribal area officials (n=3) and State Officials (n=4). We analysed user perceptions along seven key HIS processes: data collection, transmission, processing, analysis, display, quality checking and feedback. Results: The mobile-based health information system (mHIS) was found to be supportive of the MNCH continuum of care by improving the regularity and timeliness of access to robust data. Respondents noted that data errors were reduced in real time through automated error checking and data processing, which also reduced users’ workloads. The mHIS additionally enabled users to analyse both individual and aggregate data, allowing them to identify specific individuals in need of services or training as well as to identify general trends in service delivery. The system's data display and feedback mechanisms were viewed as improving data use for decision-making. The remaining challenges of the mHIS versus the paper-based HIS included resource, infrastructural and technological barriers that hindered efficient use over time. Conclusions: As compared to paper-based HIS systems, mobile technologies can improve health information processes in resource-poor settings. More efforts are needed to ensure sufficient financial investment, training and use of mHIS data at all levels of the HIS.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other studies have shown that poor network coverage and signal strength are often a major limitation to implementation of mobile technologies.
“Other studies have shown that poor network coverage and signal strength are often a major limitation to implementation of mobile technologies [23, 27, 31, 65, 66].”
Other research studies have found that technical issues such as screen freezes and delayed uploads impede efficient use and limit user uptake of mobile health applications.
“These findings align with other research studies that have found technical issues such as screen freezes and delayed uploads impede efficient use and limit user uptake of mobile health applications [27, 55, 67].”
Other studies have demonstrated the benefits of equipping health workers with data management technologies to improve the continuity of care in rural populations.
“These findings align with other studies that have demonstrated the benefits of equipping health workers with data management technologies to improve the continuity of care in rural populations [27, 61].”
Cites
Labrique, A. B., Vasudevan, L., Kochi, E., Fabricant, R., & Mehl, G. (2013) · Global Health: Science and Practice · doi:10.9745/ghsp-d-13-00031 · Cited by 601 · see citing works
Self-citationTamrat, T., & Kachnowski, S. (2012) · Maternal and Child Health Journal · doi:10.1007/s10995-011-0836-3 · Cited by 312 · see citing works
Reaching Remote Health Workers in Malawi: Baseline Assessment of a Pilot mHealth Intervention
Lemay, N. V., Sullivan, T., Jumbe, B., & Perry, C. P. (2012) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2011.649106 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Odendaal, W. A., Anstey Watkins, J., Leon, N., Goudge, J., Griffiths, F., Tomlinson, M., & Daniels, K. (2020) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011942.pub2 · Cited by 289 · see citing works
Rothstein, J. D., Jennings, L., Moorthy, A., Yang, F., Gee, L., Romano, K., Hutchful, D., Labrique, A. B., & LeFevre, A. E. (2016) · International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications · doi:10.1155/2016/2515420 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Nguyen, L. H., LeFevre, A. E., Jennings, L., Agarwal, S., Mehl, G., Labrique, A. B., & Chava, L. D.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- World Health Organization (CH)
- Human Development Unit, Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty, Hyderabad, India
- Corresponding author
- LeFevre, Amnesty E
- Venue
- BMJ Innovations
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2015-09-30
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 167-173
- ISSN
- 2055-642X (ISSN-L)
- 2055-8074
- OpenAlex
- W2415340891
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 2.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BMJ Innovations (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Keywords
- mobile health information systems, maternal, newborn and child health, community health workers, user perception, data collection, data quality checks, decision-making, resource-limited settings, Andhra Pradesh
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review