塔吉克斯坦卫生设施评估中现场调查和手机调查的结果比较:验证研究方案

Pablo Amor Fernandez, Rachel Neill, Ruchika Bhatia, Jigyasa Sharma, Kathryn Andrews, Sven Neelsen, Etoile Pinder, Marifat Abdullaev, Firuza Safarova, Mutriba Latypova, Mirja Channa Sjoblom, Tashrik Ahmed, Michael A Peters, Ashley Sheffel, Tawab Hashemi, Peter Meredith Hansen, Gafur Muhsinzoda, Gil Shapira
{"title":"塔吉克斯坦卫生设施评估中现场调查和手机调查的结果比较:验证研究方案","authors":"Pablo Amor Fernandez, Rachel Neill, Ruchika Bhatia, Jigyasa Sharma, Kathryn Andrews, Sven Neelsen, Etoile Pinder, Marifat Abdullaev, Firuza Safarova, Mutriba Latypova, Mirja Channa Sjoblom, Tashrik Ahmed, Michael A Peters, Ashley Sheffel, Tawab Hashemi, Peter Meredith Hansen, Gafur Muhsinzoda, Gil Shapira","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.15.24312090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Health facility assessments provide important data to measure the quality of health services delivered to populations. These assessments are comprehensive, resource intensive, and periodic to inform medium- to-longer-term policies. However, in absence of other reliable data sources, country decision makers often rely on outdated data to address service delivery challenges that change more frequently. High-frequency phone surveys are a potential option to improve the efficiency and timeliness of collecting time-sensitive service delivery indicators in-between comprehensive in-person assessments. The objectives of this study are to assess the reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and non-response rates in a rapid phone-based health facility assessment developed by the Global Financing Facility’s FASTR initiative compared to a comprehensive in-person health facility assessment developed by the World Bank’s Service Delivery Indicators Health Program. The in-person survey and corresponding in-person item verification will serve as the gold standard. Both surveys will be administered to an identical sample of 500 health facilities in Tajikistan using the same data collection entity. To assess reliability, percent agreement, Cohens Kappa, and prevalence and bias adjusted Kappa will be calculated. To assess concurrent criterion validity, sensitivity and specificity will be calculated, with a cut-off of .7 used for adequate validity. The study will further compare response rates and dropout rates of both surveys using simple t-tests and balance tests to identify if the characteristics of the phone-based and in-person survey samples are similar after accounting for any differences in survey response rates. The results of this study will provide important insights into the reliability and validity of phone-based data collection approaches for health facility assessments. This is critical as Ministries of Health seek to establish and sustain more continuous data collection, analysis, and use of health facility-level data to complement periodic in-person assessments to improve the quality of services provided to their populations.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the results of in-person and mobile phone surveys for a health facility assessment in Tajikistan: a validation study protocol\",\"authors\":\"Pablo Amor Fernandez, Rachel Neill, Ruchika Bhatia, Jigyasa Sharma, Kathryn Andrews, Sven Neelsen, Etoile Pinder, Marifat Abdullaev, Firuza Safarova, Mutriba Latypova, Mirja Channa Sjoblom, Tashrik Ahmed, Michael A Peters, Ashley Sheffel, Tawab Hashemi, Peter Meredith Hansen, Gafur Muhsinzoda, Gil Shapira\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.08.15.24312090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Health facility assessments provide important data to measure the quality of health services delivered to populations. These assessments are comprehensive, resource intensive, and periodic to inform medium- to-longer-term policies. However, in absence of other reliable data sources, country decision makers often rely on outdated data to address service delivery challenges that change more frequently. High-frequency phone surveys are a potential option to improve the efficiency and timeliness of collecting time-sensitive service delivery indicators in-between comprehensive in-person assessments. The objectives of this study are to assess the reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and non-response rates in a rapid phone-based health facility assessment developed by the Global Financing Facility’s FASTR initiative compared to a comprehensive in-person health facility assessment developed by the World Bank’s Service Delivery Indicators Health Program. The in-person survey and corresponding in-person item verification will serve as the gold standard. Both surveys will be administered to an identical sample of 500 health facilities in Tajikistan using the same data collection entity. To assess reliability, percent agreement, Cohens Kappa, and prevalence and bias adjusted Kappa will be calculated. To assess concurrent criterion validity, sensitivity and specificity will be calculated, with a cut-off of .7 used for adequate validity. The study will further compare response rates and dropout rates of both surveys using simple t-tests and balance tests to identify if the characteristics of the phone-based and in-person survey samples are similar after accounting for any differences in survey response rates. The results of this study will provide important insights into the reliability and validity of phone-based data collection approaches for health facility assessments. This is critical as Ministries of Health seek to establish and sustain more continuous data collection, analysis, and use of health facility-level data to complement periodic in-person assessments to improve the quality of services provided to their populations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.15.24312090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.15.24312090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

卫生设施评估为衡量为民众提供的卫生服务质量提供了重要数据。这些评估是全面的、资源密集型的,并定期为中长期政策提供信息。然而,由于缺乏其他可靠的数据来源,国家决策者往往依赖过时的数据来应对变化更为频繁的服务提供挑战。高频率电话调查是一种潜在的选择,可以提高在全面的面对面评估之间收集具有时间敏感性的服务提供指标的效率和及时性。本研究的目的是评估全球融资机制 FASTR 计划开发的基于电话的快速医疗设施评估与世界银行服务提供指标健康计划开发的全面面对面医疗设施评估的可靠性、并发标准有效性和无应答率。现场调查和相应的现场项目核实将作为黄金标准。这两项调查将使用相同的数据收集实体,对塔吉克斯坦的 500 家医疗机构进行相同的抽样调查。为评估可靠性,将计算一致性百分比、科恩斯卡帕(Cohens Kappa)、普遍性卡帕(prevalence Kappa)和偏差调整卡帕(bias adjusted Kappa)。为评估并发标准有效性,将计算灵敏度和特异性,并以 0.7 作为充分有效性的临界值。本研究将使用简单的 t 检验和平衡检验进一步比较两种调查的回复率和退出率,以确定在考虑调查回复率的差异后,电话调查样本和现场调查样本的特征是否相似。这项研究的结果将为卫生机构评估中基于电话的数据收集方法的可靠性和有效性提供重要启示。这对于卫生部寻求建立和维持更持续的数据收集、分析和使用卫生设施层面的数据,以补充定期的现场评估,从而提高为其人口提供的服务质量至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of the results of in-person and mobile phone surveys for a health facility assessment in Tajikistan: a validation study protocol
Health facility assessments provide important data to measure the quality of health services delivered to populations. These assessments are comprehensive, resource intensive, and periodic to inform medium- to-longer-term policies. However, in absence of other reliable data sources, country decision makers often rely on outdated data to address service delivery challenges that change more frequently. High-frequency phone surveys are a potential option to improve the efficiency and timeliness of collecting time-sensitive service delivery indicators in-between comprehensive in-person assessments. The objectives of this study are to assess the reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and non-response rates in a rapid phone-based health facility assessment developed by the Global Financing Facility’s FASTR initiative compared to a comprehensive in-person health facility assessment developed by the World Bank’s Service Delivery Indicators Health Program. The in-person survey and corresponding in-person item verification will serve as the gold standard. Both surveys will be administered to an identical sample of 500 health facilities in Tajikistan using the same data collection entity. To assess reliability, percent agreement, Cohens Kappa, and prevalence and bias adjusted Kappa will be calculated. To assess concurrent criterion validity, sensitivity and specificity will be calculated, with a cut-off of .7 used for adequate validity. The study will further compare response rates and dropout rates of both surveys using simple t-tests and balance tests to identify if the characteristics of the phone-based and in-person survey samples are similar after accounting for any differences in survey response rates. The results of this study will provide important insights into the reliability and validity of phone-based data collection approaches for health facility assessments. This is critical as Ministries of Health seek to establish and sustain more continuous data collection, analysis, and use of health facility-level data to complement periodic in-person assessments to improve the quality of services provided to their populations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信