A realist systematic review of evidence from low- and middle-income countries of interventions to improve immunization data use

BMC Health Services Research

Jessica C. Shearer¹  Allison L. Osterman¹  Nicole A. Salisbury¹ 

[1] PATH;

关键词: Data use;    Data quality;    Health information system;    Routine data;    Immunization data;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-021-06633-8

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Background The use of routine immunization data by health care professionals in low- and middle-income countries remains an underutilized resource in decision-making. Despite the significant resources invested in developing national health information systems, systematic reviews of the effectiveness of data use interventions are lacking. Applying a realist review methodology, this study synthesized evidence of effective interventions for improving data use in decision-making. Methods We searched PubMed, POPLINE, Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International Global Health, and African Journals Online for published literature. Grey literature was obtained from conference, implementer, and technical agency websites and requested from implementing organizations. Articles were included if they reported on an intervention designed to improve routine data use or reported outcomes related to data use, and targeted health care professionals as the principal data users. We developed a theory of change a priori for how we expect data use interventions to influence data use. Evidence was then synthesized according to data use intervention type and level of the health system targeted by the intervention. Results The searches yielded 549 articles, of which 102 met our inclusion criteria, including 49 from peer-reviewed journals and 53 from grey literature. A total of 66 articles reported on immunization data use interventions and 36 articles reported on data use interventions for other health sectors. We categorized 68 articles as research evidence and 34 articles as promising strategies. We identified ten primary intervention categories, including electronic immunization registries, which were the most reported intervention type (n = 14). Among the research evidence from the immunization sector, 32 articles reported intermediate outcomes related to data quality and availability, data analysis, synthesis, interpretation, and review. Seventeen articles reported data-informed decision-making as an intervention outcome, which could be explained by the lack of consensus around how to define and measure data use. Conclusions Few immunization data use interventions have been rigorously studied or evaluated. The review highlights gaps in the evidence base, which future research and better measures for assessing data use should attempt to address.

【 授权许可】

Unknown