Journal article
Scoping review assessing the evidence used to support the adoption of mobile health (mHealth) technologies for the education and training of community health workers (CHWs) in low-income and middle-income countries
- Abstract:
-
Objectives: Undertake a systematic scoping review to determine how a research evidence base, in the form of existing systematic reviews in the field of mobile health (mHealth), constitutes education and training for community health workers (CHWs) who use mobile technologies in everyday work. The review was informed by the following research questions: does educational theory inform the design of the education and training component of mHealth interventions? How is education and training with mobile technology by CHWs in low-income and middle-income countries categorised by existing systematic reviews? What is the basis for this categorisation?
Setting: The review explored the literature from 2000 to 2017 to investigate how mHealth interventions have been positioned within the available evidence base in relation to their use of formal theories of learning.
Results: The scoping review found 24 primary studies that were categorised by 16 systematic reviews as supporting CHWs’ education and training using mobile technologies. However, when formal theories of learning from educational research were used to recategorise these 24 primary studies, only four could be coded as such. This identifies a problem with how CHWs’ education and training using mobile technologies is understood and categorised within the existing evidence base. This is because there is no agreed on, theoretically informed understanding of what counts as learning.
Conclusion: The claims made by mHealth researchers and practitioners regarding the learning benefits of mobile technology are not based on research results that are underpinned by formal theories of learning. mHealth suffers from a reductionist view of learning that underestimates the complexities of the relationship between pedagogy and technology. This has resulted in miscategorisations of what constitutes CHWs’ education and training within the existing evidence base. This can be overcome by informed collaboration between the health and education communities.
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Preview, Version of record, pdf, 685.5KB, Terms of use)
-
- Publisher copy:
- 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019827
Authors
- Publisher:
- BMJ Publishing Group
- Journal:
- BMJ Open More from this journal
- Volume:
- 8
- Issue:
- 7
- Article number:
- e019827
- Publication date:
- 2018-07-30
- Acceptance date:
- 2018-06-13
- DOI:
- ISSN:
-
2044-6055
- Pubs id:
-
pubs:891798
- UUID:
-
uuid:414e0b47-7529-43ed-9163-f878041472c5
- Local pid:
-
pubs:891798
- Source identifiers:
-
891798
- Deposit date:
-
2018-07-31
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- © Winter, Langer, and Geniets, 2018 Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC No commercial re-use See rights and permissions Published by BMJ
- Copyright date:
- 2018
- Notes:
- This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record