Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Public Health
Sec. Public Health Policy
Volume 12 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1443862
This article is part of the Research Topic Toward a Decision-Centric Precision Public Health: Clinical, Operational, and Analytical Advances View all 9 articles

Digital health and quality of care in Primary Health Care: an evaluation model

Provisionally accepted
Ísis d. Silva Ísis d. Silva 1*CICERA SILVA CICERA SILVA 2Cláudia S. Martiniano Cláudia S. Martiniano 3Aguinaldo José De Araújo Aguinaldo José De Araújo 1Renan C. Figueirêdo Renan C. Figueirêdo 1Luís V. Lapão Luís V. Lapão 4Renan C. Moioli Renan C. Moioli 5Ewerton W. Gomes Brito Ewerton W. Gomes Brito 1SEVERINA ALICE D. UCHOA SEVERINA ALICE D. UCHOA 1
  • 1 Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
  • 2 Federal University of Campina Grande, Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil
  • 3 State University of Paraíba, Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brazil
  • 4 Global Health and Tropical Medicine, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
  • 5 Digital Metropolis Institute, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    The implementation of technologies in Primary Health Care with monitoring and evaluation of the quality of health care is fundamental to direct the access and quality of health care in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals. Our objective was to develop a model for evaluating digital health interventions in primary care, considering its impact on first contact, longitudinality, integrality and coordination in health. Methodology: This is an exploratory methodological study of a qualitative nature. This study seeks to explore strategic actors' perceptions of an evaluation model, and was developed in a process between June 2021 and March 2024. The following stages were followed: Identification of previous models available in the literature, model development, model validation, model update. We performed a nominal group consensus technique online with seven experts. Stages taken to define the design of the model: sending the elaborated model, together with an electronic form with 18 subjective questions, such as brainstorming strategy, for recording impressions, judgment of agreement and suggestions; workshop for discussion by videoconference, at the time the objectives and the model diagram were presented, followed by debate with clarification of doubts and suggestions for clarification of the step-by-step design. After incorporating the suggestions, the model agreed upon in the workshop was subjected to another analysis by the same experts, sent in an online Google document, in which possible inconsistencies between the proposed model and the agreed one were verified, as well as the final agreement on the recommended proposal. At the end of this stage, with synchronous and asynchronous remote procedures, consensus was reached. Results: The proposed evaluation model presents as primary categories, structure, process and result.

    Keywords: Health evaluation1, Evaluation models2, health care quality, access, and Evaluation3; Digital health4, primary health care5

    Received: 04 Jun 2024; Accepted: 07 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Silva, SILVA, Martiniano, José De Araújo, Figueirêdo, Lapão, Moioli, Gomes Brito and UCHOA. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Ísis d. Silva, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.