Digital technology for health sector governance in low and middle income countries: A scoping review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Poor governance impedes the provision of equitable and cost-effective health care in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although systemic problems such as corruption and inefficiency have been characterized as intractable, "good governance" interventions that promote transparency, accountability and public participation have yielded encouraging results. Mobile phones and other Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are beginning to play a role in these interventions, but little is known about their use and effects in the context of LMIC health care. METHODS: Multi-stage scoping review: Research questions and scope were refined through a landscape scan of relevant implementation activities and by analyzing related concepts in the literature. Relevant studies were identified through iterative Internet searches (Google, Google Scholar), a systematic search of academic databases (PubMed, Web of Science), social media crowdsourcing (targeted LinkedIn and Twitter appeals) and reading reference lists and websites of relevant organizations. Parallel expert interviews helped to verify concepts and emerging findings and identified additional studies for inclusion. Results were charted, analyzed thematically and summarized. RESULTS: We identified 34 articles from a wide range of disciplines and sectors, including 17 published research articles and 17 grey literature reports. Analysis of these articles revealed 15 distinct ways of using ICTs for good governance activities in LMIC health care. These use cases clustered into four conceptual categories: 1) gathering and verifying information on services to improve transparency and auditability 2) aggregating and visualizing data to aid communication and decision making 3) mobilizing citizens in reporting poor practices to improve accountability and quality and 4) automating and auditing processes to prevent fraud. Despite a considerable amount of implementation activity, we identified little formal evaluative research. CONCLUSION: Innovative digital approaches are increasingly being used to facilitate good governance in the health sectors of LMICs but evidence of their effectiveness is still limited. More empirical studies are needed to measure concrete impacts, document mechanisms of action, and elucidate the political and sociotechnical dynamics that make designing and implementing ICTs for good governance so complex. Many digital good governance interventions are driven by an assumption that transparency alone will effect change; however responsive feedback mechanisms are also likely to be necessary.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Scoping reviews are often used to examine emerging topics that are poorly understood, where research is at an early stage, or where pertinent knowledge is being generated outside academia.
“Scoping reviews are often used to examine emerging topics that are poorly understood, where research is at an early stage, or where pertinent knowledge is being generated outside academia.”
From People analytics—A scoping review of conceptual boundaries and value propositions (2018) · cites this paper as Holeman, Cookson, & Pagliari, 2016
Scoping reviews address broad rather than narrow research questions and seek to profile the literature and understand it holistically, rather than to critically appraise the methodological quality of individual studies.
“Scoping reviews thus address broad rather than narrow research questions and seek to profile the literature and understand it holistically, rather than to critically appraise the methodological quality of individual studies (Holeman, Cookson, & Pagliari, 2016).”
From People analytics—A scoping review of conceptual boundaries and value propositions (2018) · cites this paper as Holeman, Cookson, & Pagliari, 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review
Armstrong, R., Hall, B. J., Doyle, J., & Waters, E. (2011) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdr015 · Cited by 1,260 · see citing works
Björkman, M., & Svensson, J. (2009) · Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/qjec.2009.124.2.735 · Cited by 739 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 24
- [1]Jain A Nundy S Abbasi K Corruption: medicine’s dirty open secret. BMJ 2014 348 g4184 10.1136/bmj.g4184 24965786 · DOI
- [8]Friedman CP Wong AK Blumenthal D Achieving a nationwide learning health system. Sci Transl Med 2010 2 57cm29 10.1126/scitranslmed.3001456 21068440 · DOI · Paper page
- [9]Scally G Donaldson LJ Clinical governance and the drive for quality improvement in the new NHS in England. BMJ 1998 317 61 5 10.1136/bmj.317.7150.61 9651278 PMC1113460 · DOI
- [10]Vanu Som C. Clinical governance: a fresh look at its definition. Clinical Governance. 2004; 9: 87- 90.
- [14]Mackey TK Liang BA A United Nations global health panel for global health governance. Soc Sci Med 2013 76 12 5 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.09.038 23121855 · DOI
- [15]Frenk J Moon S Governance challenges in global health. N Engl J Med 2013 368 936 42 10.1056/NEJMra1109339 23465103 · DOI
- [16]Kosack S Fung A Does transparency improve governance? Annu Rev Polit Sci 2014 17 65 87 10.1146/annurev-polisci-032210-144356 · DOI
- [17]Olken B, Pande R, Dhaliwal I, Dragusanu R, Marshall C. Governance Review Paper: J–PAL Governance Initiative Cambridge, MA: Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab., 2011.
- [18]Joshi A Houtzager PP Widgets or watchdogs? Conceptual explorations in social accountability. Public Manage Rev 2012 14 145 62 10.1080/14719037.2012.657837 · DOI · Paper page
- [21]Estevez E Janowski T Electronic governance for sustainable development: conceptual framework and state of research. Government Information Quarterly 2013 30 S94 109 10.1016/j.giq.2012.11.001 · DOI
- [22]Hovenga EJ, Grain H, editors. Health information governance in a digital environment. Ios Press, 2013.
- [23]Holeman I, Cookson TP, Pagliari C. Digital technology for health sector governance. Leadership, Management and Governance (LMG) Project. USAID, 2016. PMC5017033 27648255
- [25]Arksey H O'Malley L Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005 8 19 32 10.1080/1364557032000119616 · DOI · Paper page
- [26]Holeman I, Cookson TP, Pagliari C. Digital technology for health sector governance. Leadership, Management and Governance (LMG) Project. USAID, 2016. PMC5017033 27648255
- [27]Ahmed T Lucas H Khan AS Islam R Bhuiya A Iqbal M eHealth and mHealth initiatives in Bangladesh: a scoping study. BMC Health Serv Res 2014 14 260 10.1186/1472-6963-14-260 24934164 PMC4072608 · DOI
- [29]Levac D Colquhoun H O’Brien KK Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010 5 69 10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 20854677 PMC2954944 · DOI · Paper page
- [30]Blaya JA Fraser HSF Holt B E–health technologies show promise in developing countries. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010 29 244 51 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0894 20348068 · DOI · Paper page
- [37]Bott M Young G The role of crowdsourcing for better governance in international development Praxis. The Fletcher Journal of Human Security. 2012 27 47 70
- [38]Green E Kloos B Facilitating youth participation in a context of forced migration: a photovoice project in northern Uganda. J Refug Stud 2009 22 460 82 10.1093/jrs/fep026 · DOI
- [42]McCarthy T, DeRenzi B, Blumenstock J, Brunskill E. Towards operationalizing outlier detection in community health programs. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information and Communications Technologies and Development: Notes–Volume 2; 2013 Dec 7; p. 88-91.
- [50]United Nations. Chapter 6: Bridging The Digital Divide, United Nations e–government survey 2014. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2014.
- [52]Holeman I Evans J Kane D Grant L Pagliari C Weller D Mobile health for cancer in low to middle income countries: priorities for research and development. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2014 23 750 6 10.1111/ecc.12250 25324023 · DOI · Paper page
- [54]Bannon LJ, Ehn P. Design: design matters in participatory design. In: Simonsen J, Robertsen T. (eds) Routledge international handbook of participatory design. New York: Routledge, 2012. p.37-63.
- [55]Franco M Tursunbayeva A Pagliari C Social media for e–Government in the public health sector: protocol for a systematic review. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 5 e42 10.2196/resprot.5421 26969199 PMC4808239 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Global strategy on digital health
Dhingra, D., & Dabas, A. (2020) · Indian Pediatrics · doi:10.1007/s13312-020-1789-7 · Cited by 656 · see citing works
Human-centered design for global health equity
Holeman, I., & Kane, D. (2020) · Information Technology for Development · doi:10.1080/02681102.2019.1667289 · Cited by 285 · see citing works
Self-citationPeople analytics—A scoping review of conceptual boundaries and value propositions
Tursunbayeva, A., Di Lauro, S., & Pagliari, C. (2018) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.08.002 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Self-citationThe ethics of people analytics: risks, opportunities and recommendations
Tursunbayeva, A., Pagliari, C., Di Lauro, S., & Antonelli, G. (2022) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-12-2019-0680 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Holeman, I., Cookson, T. P., & Pagliari, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pagliari, Claudia
- Venue
- Journal of Global Health
- Published
- 2016-09-07
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 020408-020408
- ISSN
- 2047-2978 (ISSN-L)
- 2047-2986
- PMC
- PMC5017033
- OpenAlex
- W2517330007
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6
- FWCI
- 9.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Global Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- United States Agency for International Development (AIDOAAA1100015)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/J017728/1, EP/J017728/2)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare Systems and Practices
- Keywords
- health sector governance, good governance, information and communication technologies, mobile devices, transparency, accountability, citizen participation, corruption, fraud prevention, data visualization, citizen reporting, low- and middle-income countries, digital health interventions
- MeSH terms
- Communication, Communications Media, Decision Making, Delivery of Health Care, Developing Countries, Fraud, Government, Health Services, Humans, Income, Information Services, Social Responsibility, Technology, Internet, Cell Phone
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