Cited by 22Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsICT in Developing CommunitiesClinical practice guidelines implementation

Decreasing workload among community health workers using interactive, structured, rich-media guidelines on smartphones

Iyengar, M. Sriram, Florez-Arango, Jose F.·2013·Technology and Health Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, in developing countries, there is considerable interest in using mobile phones as job-aids for community health workers (CHWs) to improve the care they provide. However, acceptance of new technologies can be inhibited if the workload imposed is perceived as excessive compared to existing methods. OBJECTIVE: To compare perceived workload of CHWs using clinical care guidelines presented on mobile phones versus using conventional paper-based guidelines. METHODS: Validated clinical practice guidelines were developed as Interactive Structured Rich-Medical guidelines (ISRMGs) on Windows Mobile 6.5 mobile phones. A prospective randomized controlled study was performed in Colombia in which 50 CHWs used the ISRMGs, and paper-based materials with the same information, in a cross-over design to diagnose and treat 15 matched pairs of medical cases presented on Human Patient simulators. The NASA Task Load Index, a validated measure of perceived workload, was administered and results compared by means of a mixed model analysis. RESULTS: When using the ISRMGs on mobile phones the health workers reported statistically significant decreases in mental demand, frustration, and overall workload as compared to using paper-based job-aids. CONCLUSIONS: Use of ISRMGs on mobile phones by community health workers in developing countries has the potential to decrease their perceived workload, fatigue, and enhance their ability to provide better care for more patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/thc-130713

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Iyengar, M. S., & Florez-Arango, J. F.
Affiliations
  • School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
  • Universidad de Antioquia (CO)
Venue
Technology and Health Care
Published
2013-02-28
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
113-123
ISSN
  • 0928-7329 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-7401
OpenAlex
W1558036224
Cited by
22
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Technology and Health Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Microsoft Research
  • Johnson Space Center
  • Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center
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 › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
community health workers, perceived workload, mobile devices, job aids, NASA-TLX, human patient simulator, mental demand, fatigue, developing countries
MeSH terms
Colombia, Community Health Workers, Female, Humans, Male, Manikins, Workload, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Cross-Over Studies, Cell Phone, Young Adult

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