Introduction Despite the growing global application of mobile health (mHealth) technology in maternal and child health, the contextual factors and mechanisms by which interventional outcomes are generated have not been subjected to extensive review. In this study, we sought to identify context, mechanisms and outcome elements from implementation and evaluation studies of mHealth interventions to formulate theories or models explicating how mHealth interventions work (or not) both for health care providers and for pregnant women and new mothers. Method An electronic search of six online databases (Medline, Pubmed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Academic Search Premier and Health Systems Evidence) was performed. Using appropriate MeSH terms and selection procedure, 32 articles were considered for analysis. A theory-driven approach, narrative synthesis, was applied to synthesise the data. Thematic content analysis was used to delineate the elements of the intervention, including its context, actors, mechanism and outcomes. Retroduction was applied to link these elements using a realist evaluation heuristic to form generative theories. Results Mechanisms that promote the implementation of mHealth by community health workers/health care providers include motivation, perceived skill and knowledge improvement, improved self-e cacy, improved con dence, improved relationship between community health workers and clients, perceived support of community health workers, perceived ease of use and usefulness of mHealth, For pregnant women and new mothers, mechanisms that trigger the uptake of mHealth and use of maternal and child health services included: perceived service satisfaction, perceived knowledge acquisition, support and con dence, improved self-e cacy, encouragement, empowerment and motivation. Information overload was identi ed as a potential negative mechanism for the uptake of maternal and child health services. Conclusion The models developed in this study provide a detailed understanding of the implementation and uptake of mHealth interventions and how they improve maternal and child health services in low and middle income countries. These models provide a foundation for the 'white box' or theory-driven evaluation of mHealth intervention and can improve the rollout and implementation where required.
Realist evaluation submits that theories and models of how, why, for whom and under what circumstances programs work could be formulated by conceptualizing the relational links between the context within which programs are implemented, the generative mechanisms the programs trigger, and the outcomes of interest. Qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis allow for the description of the relevant context, the generative mechanisms, and the emergent outcomes of programs and provide explanatory power to link these elements. The ‘realist interviewing technique’, whereby interviewees comment on a suggested ‘program theory’ to provide refinement, is proposed as a distinctive approach for conducting interviews in a realist-informed inquiry. However, the application of this interviewing strategy within the realist evaluation studies is underutilized. In this study, we demonstrate how the realist interview technique reinforces and maintains theoretical awareness and contributes to trustworthiness through three theory-building phases: theory gleaning, theory refining, and theory consolidation.
BackgroundRealist evaluation offers an interesting approach to evaluation of interventions in complex settings, but has been little applied in health care. We report on a realist case study of a well performing hospital in Ghana and show how such a realist evaluation design can help to overcome the limited external validity of a traditional case study.MethodsWe developed a realist evaluation framework for hypothesis formulation, data collection, data analysis and synthesis of the findings. Focusing on the role of human resource management in hospital performance, we formulated our hypothesis around the high commitment management concept. Mixed methods were used in data collection, including individual and group interviews, observations and document reviews.ResultsWe found that the human resource management approach (the actual intervention) included induction of new staff, training and personal development, good communication and information sharing, and decentralised decision-making. We identified 3 additional practices: ensuring optimal physical working conditions, access to top managers and managers' involvement on the work floor. Teamwork, recognition and trust emerged as key elements of the organisational climate. Interviewees reported high levels of organisational commitment. The analysis unearthed perceived organisational support and reciprocity as underlying mechanisms that link the management practices with commitment.Methodologically, we found that realist evaluation can be fruitfully used to develop detailed case studies that analyse how management interventions work and in which conditions. Analysing the links between intervention, mechanism and outcome increases the explaining power, while identification of essential context elements improves the usefulness of the findings for decision-makers in other settings (external validity). We also identified a number of practical difficulties and priorities for further methodological development.ConclusionThis case suggests that a well-balanced HRM bundle can stimulate organisational commitment of health workers. Such practices can be implemented even with narrow decision spaces. Realist evaluation provides an appropriate approach to increase the usefulness of case studies to managers and policymakers.
BackgroundUse of evidence in health policymaking plays an important role, especially in resource-constrained settings where informed decisions on resource allocation are paramount. Several knowledge translation (KT) models have been developed, but few have been applied to health policymaking in low income countries. If KT models are expected to explain evidence uptake and implementation, or lack of it, they must be contextualized and take into account the specificity of low income countries for example, the strong influence of donors. The main objective of this research is to elaborate a Middle Range Theory (MRT) of KT in Uganda that can also serve as a reference for other low- and middle income countries.MethodsThis two-step study employed qualitative approaches to examine the principal barriers and facilitating factors to KT. Step 1 involved a literature review and identification of common themes. The results informed the development of the initial MRT, which details the facilitating factors and barriers to KT at the different stages of research and policy development. In Step 2, these were further refined through key informant interviews with policymakers and researchers in Uganda. Deductive content and thematic analysis was carried out to assess the degree of convergence with the elements of the initial MRT and to identify other emerging issues.ResultsReview of the literature revealed that the most common emerging facilitating factors could be grouped under institutional strengthening for KT, research characteristics, dissemination, partnerships and political context. The analysis of interviews, however, showed that policymakers and researchers ranked institutional strengthening for KT, research characteristics and partnerships as the most important. New factors emphasized by respondents were the use of mainstreamed structures within MoH to coordinate and disseminate research, the separation of roles between researchers and policymakers, and the role of the community and civil society in KT.ConclusionsThis study refined an initial MRT on KT in policymaking in the health sector in Uganda that was based on a literature review. It provides a framework that can be used in empirical research of the process of KT on specific policy issues.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.