skip to main content
10.1145/3287098.3287111acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesictdConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Opportunities and challenges in connecting care recipients to the community health feedback loop

Published:04 January 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the design space of feedback systems that connect care recipients to the community health feedback loop. While related work in this vein has often emphasized gathering feedback for the sake of transparency alone, our study emphasizes opportunities to integrate the collection and use of feedback in ways that may improve the quality or equity of routine health services. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 23 participants in Kenya. Our field study makes current feedback practices visible; and reveals barriers faced by beneficiaries, community health workers, and their supervisors. Our findings identify relevant socio-technical complexities, and we outline concrete opportunities to design feedback systems that support and augment current practices. These contributions to the ICTD literature hold potential to inform the design of feedback systems that engage underserved populations in a systematic and equitable manner.

References

  1. Yaw Anokwa, Thomas N Smyth, Divya Ramachandran, Jahanzeb Sherwani, Yael Schwartzman, Rowena Luk, Melissa Ho, Neema Moraveji, and Brian DeRenzi. 2009. Stories from the field: Reflections on HCI4D experiences. Information Technologies & International Development 5, 4 (2009), pp--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Nava Ashraf, Oriana Bandiera, and B Kelsey Jack. 2014. No margin, no mission? A field experiment on incentives for public service delivery. Journal of Public Economics 120 (2014), 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Peter Barron, Yogan Pillay, Antonio Fernandes, Jane Sebidi, and Rob Allen. 2016. The MomConnect mHealth initiative in South Africa: Early impact on the supply side of MCH services. Journal of public health policy 37, 2 (2016), 201--212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Michael S Bernstein, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, Drew Harry, Paul André, Katrina Panovich, and Gregory G Vargas. 2011. 4chan and/b: An Analysis of Anonymity and Ephemerality in a Large Online Community.. In ICWSM. 50--57.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Dipanjan Chakraborty and Aaditeshwar Seth. 2015. Building citizen engagement into the implementation of welfare schemes in rural India. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development. ACM, 22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Apala Lahiri Chavan. 2005. Another culture, another method. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 21. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Steven S Coughlin. 1990. Recall bias in epidemiologic studies. Journal of clinical epidemiology 43, 1 (1990), 87--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Nicola Dell, Vidya Vaidyanathan, Indrani Medhi, Edward Cutrell, and William Thies. 2012. Yours is better!: participant response bias in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1321--1330. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Brian DeRenzi, Nicola Dell, Jeremy Wacksman, Scott Lee, and Neal Lesh. 2017. Supporting community health workers in India through voice-and web-based feedback. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2770--2781. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Brian DeRenzi, Jeremy Wacksman, Nicola Dell, Scott Lee, Neal Lesh, Gaetano Borriello, and Andrew Ellner. 2016. Closing the feedback Loop: A 12-month evaluation of ASTA, a self-tracking application for ASHAs. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development. ACM, 22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Andy Dow, John Vines, Rob Comber, and Rob Wilson. 2016. ThoughtCloud: Exploring the role of feedback technologies in care organisations. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3625--3636. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Andy Dow, John Vines, Toby Lowe, Rob Comber, and Rob Wilson. 2017. What Happens to Digital Feedback?: Studying the Use of a Feedback Capture Platform by Care Organisations. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 5813--5825. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Brittany Fiore-Silfvast, Carl Hartung, Kirti Iyengar, Sharad Iyengar, Kiersten Israel-Ballard, Noah Perin, and Richard Anderson. 2013. Mobile video for patient education: the midwives' perspective. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Computing for Development. ACM, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Mareike Glöss, Moira McGregor, and Barry Brown. 2016. Designing for labour: uber and the on-demand mobile workforce. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1632--1643. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Melissa R Ho, Thomas N Smyth, Matthew Kam, and Andy Dearden. 2009. Human-computer interaction for development: The past, present, and future. Information Technologies & International Development 5, 4 (2009), pp--1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Isaac Holeman, Tara Patricia Cookson, and Claudia Pagliari. 2016. Digital technology for health sector governance in low and middle income countries: a scoping review. Journal of global health 6, 2 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Lilly Irani. 2010. HCI on the move: methods, culture, values. In CHI'10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2939--2942. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Peter Kollock. 1999. The production of trust in online markets. Advances in group processes 16, 1 (1999), 99--123.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Stephen Kosack and Archon Fung. 2014. Does transparency improve governance? Annual Review of Political Science 17 (2014), 65--87.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Jonathan Ledlie. 2010. Huzzah for my Thing: Evaluating a Pilot of a Mobile Service in Kenya. Qual Meets Quant, London, UK (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Xiao Ma, Jeff Hancock, and Mor Naaman. 2016. Anonymity, intimacy and self-disclosure in social media. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3857--3869. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Xiao Ma, Jeffrey T Hancock, Kenneth Lim Mingjie, and Mor Naaman. 2017. Self-Disclosure and Perceived Trustworthiness of Airbnb Host Profiles.. In CSCW. 2397--2409. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Mikhail I Melnik and James Alm. 2002. Does a seller's ecommerce reputation matter? Evidence from eBay auctions. The journal of industrial economics 50, 3 (2002), 337--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Anjali K Mohan, Edward Cutrell, and Balaji Parthasarathy. 2013. Instituting credibility, accountability and transparency in local service delivery?: helpline and Aasthi in Karnataka, India. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development: Full Papers-Volume 1. ACM, 238--247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Maletsabisa Molapo, Melissa Densmore, and Brian DeRenzi. 2017. Video Consumption Patterns for First Time Smartphone Users: Community Health Workers in Lesotho. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 6159--6170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Maletsabisa Molapo, Melissa Densmore, and Limpho Morie. 2016. Apps and Skits: Enabling New Forms of Village-To-Clinic Feedback for Rural Health Education. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Symposium on Computing for Development. ACM, 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Kiran Gopakumar Rajalekshmi. 2007. E-governance services through telecenters: The role of human intermediary and issues of trust. Information Technologies & International Development 4, 1 (2007), pp--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Subhajyoti Ray. 2012. Reinforcing accountability in public services: an ICT enabled framework. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 6, 2 (2012), 135--148.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. David Sando, Hannah Ratcliffe, Kathleen McDonald, Donna Spiegelman, Goodluck Lyatuu, Mary Mwanyika-Sando, Faida Emil, Mary Nell Wegner, Guerino Chalamilla, and Ana Langer. 2016. The prevalence of disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth in urban Tanzania. BMC pregnancy and childbirth 16, 1 (2016), 236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Phoebe Sengers, Kirsten Boehner, Shay David, and Joseph'Jofish' Kaye. 2005. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility. ACM, 49--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Debra Singh, Joel Negin, Michael Otim, Christopher Garimoi Orach, and Robert Cumming. 2015. The effect of payment and incentives on motivation and focus of community health workers: five case studies from low-and middle-income countries. Human resources for health 13, 1 (2015), 58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Vivek Srinivasan, Vibhore Vardhan, Snigdha Kar, Siddhartha Asthana, Rajendran Narayanan, Pushpendra Singh, Dipanjan Chakraborty, Amarjeet Singh, and Aaditeshwar Seth. 2013. Airavat: An automated system to increase transparency and accountability in social welfare schemes in India. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information and Communications Technologies and Development: Notes-Volume 2. ACM, 151--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Anselm Strauss and Juliet M Corbin. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Steven Tadelis. 2016. Reputation and feedback systems in online platform markets. Annual Review of Economics 8 (2016), 321--340.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. U-Report. 2018. (2018). Retrieved July 21, 2018 from http://www.ureport.in./.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Aditya Vashistha, Fabian Okeke, Richard Anderson, and Nicola Dell. 2018. "You Can Always Do Better!" The Impact of Social Proof on Participant Response Bias. (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Caroline Whidden, Kassoum Kayentao, Jenny X Liu, Scott Lee, Youssouf Keita, Djoume Diakite, Alexander Keita, Samba Diarra, Jacqueline Edwards, Amanda Yembrick, Isaac Holeman, Salif Samake, Boureima Plea, Mama Coumare, and Ari D Johnson. 2018. Improving Community Health Worker performance by using a personalised feedback dashboard for supervision: a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Global Health, 8(2). (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICTD '19: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development
    January 2019
    422 pages
    ISBN:9781450361224
    DOI:10.1145/3287098

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 4 January 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate22of116submissions,19%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader