CHWs used WhatsApp with their supervisors to document their work, spurring healthy competition and team building between CHWs in the 2 pilot sites. While there was considerable variation in the number of times each participant posted messages—from 1 message to 270 messages—in total they posted nearly 2,000 messages over 6 months. 88% of messages corresponded to at least 1 of 3 defined supervisory objectives of (1) creating a social environment, (2) sharing communication and information, or (3) promoting quality of services.

Background: Community health workers (CHWs) are used increasingly in the world to address shortages of health workers and the lack of a pervasive national health system. However, while their role is often described at a policy level, it is not clear how these ideals are instantiated in practice, how best to support this work, or how the work is interpreted by local actors. CHWs are often spoken about or spoken for, but there is little evidence of CHWs' own characterisation of their practice, which raises questions for global health advocates regarding power and participation in CHW programmes. This paper addresses this issue. Design: A case study approach was undertaken in a series of four steps. Firstly, groups of CHWs from two communities met and reported what their daily work consisted of. Secondly, individual CHWs were interviewed so that they could provide fuller, more detailed accounts of their work and experiences; in addition, community health extension workers and community health committee members were interviewed, to provide alternative perspectives. Thirdly, notes and observations were taken in community meetings and monthly meetings. The data were then analysed thematically, creating an account of how CHWs describe their own work, and the tensions and challenges that they face. Results: The thematic analysis of the interview data explored the structure of CHW's work, in terms of the frequency and range of visits, activities undertaken during visits (monitoring, referral, etc.) and the wider context of their work (links to the community and health service, limited training, coordination and mutual support through action and discussion days, etc.), and provided an opportunity for CHWs to explain their motivations, concerns and how they understood their role.

Digital skills are an important aspect of ensuring that all young people are digitally included. Yet, there tends to be an assumption in popular discourse that young people can simply learn these skills by themselves. While experience of technologies forms an important part of the learning process, other resources (i.e., access to technology and support networks) plus clear motivations are required. Through in-depth interviews with 20 young people who are digitally excluded, this paper highlights the kinds of digital skills these young people find problematic, and the reasons why they find developing these skills so challenging. We demonstrate how poor access to technology, limited support networks and their current situation prevent these young people from gaining the experiences they need to support the development of their digital skills; and how lack of experience and inadequate skills limit the extent to which they perceive the internet to be valuable in their lives. These individual experiences, shaped very much by the wider social structure of which they are part, show how young people cannot simply be left to learn digital skills by themselves and that intervention is required to try to address some of the digital inequalities apparent in younger generations.

ObjectivesUndertake 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?SettingThe 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionThe 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.

IntroductionThis paper maps the evidence published between 2000 and 2018 on the use of mobile technologies to train community health workers (CHWs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) across nine areas of global healthcare, including the neglected areas of disability and mental health.MethodsWe used an evidence mapping methodology, based on systematic review guidelines, to systematically and transparently assess the available evidence-base. We searched eight scientific databases and 54 grey literature sources, developed explicit inclusion criteria, and coded all included studies at full text for key variables. The included evidence-base was visualised and made accessible through heat mapping and the development of an online interactive evidence interface.ResultsThe systematic search for evidence identified a total of 2530 citations of which 88 met the full inclusion criteria. Results illustrate overall gaps and clusters of evidence. While the evidence map shows a positive shift away from information dissemination towards approaches that use more interactive learner-centred pedagogies, including supervision and peer learning, this was not seen across all areas of global health. Areas of neglect remain; no studies of trauma, disability, nutrition or mental health that use information dissemination, peer learning or supervision for training CHWs in LMICs were found.ConclusionThe evidence map shows significant gaps in the use of mobile technologies for training, particularly in the currently neglected areas of global health. Significant work will be needed to improve the evidence-base, including assessing the quality of mobile-based training programmes.