Assessing the acceptability of technological health innovations in sub‑Saharan Africa: a scoping review and a best fit framework synthesis

Sarah Louart, Gildas Boris Hedible () and Valery Ridde
Additional contact information
Sarah Louart: ALIMA - Alliance for International medical Action, CLERSÉ - Centre Lillois d’Études et de Recherches Sociologiques et Économiques - UMR 8019 - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPED - UMR_D 196 - Centre population et développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPCité - Université Paris Cité
Gildas Boris Hedible: CERPOP - Centre d'Epidémiologie et de Recherche en santé des POPulations - UT3 - Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier - UT - Université de Toulouse - INSERM - Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
Valery Ridde: UCAD - Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar [Sénégal], CEPED - UMR_D 196 - Centre population et développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPCité - Université Paris Cité

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Acceptability is a key concept used to analyze the introduction of a health innovation in a specific setting. However, there seems to be a lack of clarity in this notion, both conceptually and practically. In low and middle-income countries, programs to support the diffusion of new technological tools are multiplying. They face challenges and difficulties that need to be understood with an in-depth analysis of the acceptability of these innovations. We performed a scoping review to explore the theories, methods and conceptual frameworks that have been used to measure and understand the acceptability of technological health innovations in sub-Saharan Africa. The review confirmed the lack of common definitions, conceptualizations and practical tools addressing the acceptability of health innovations. To synthesize and combine evidence, both theoretically and empirically, we then used the "best fit framework synthesis" method. Based on five conceptual and theoretical frameworks from scientific literature and evidence from 33 empirical studies, we built a conceptual framework in order to understand the acceptability of technological health innovations. This framework comprises 6 determinants (compatibility, social influence, personal emotions, perceived disadvantages, perceived advantages and perceived complexity) and two moderating factors (intervention and context). This knowledge synthesis work has also enabled us to propose a chronology of the different stages of acceptability.

Date: 2023-08-31
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-hea
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-04428148v1
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in BMC Health Services Research, 2023, BMC Health Services Research, 23 (930), ⟨10.1186/s12913-023-09897-4⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-04428148v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04428148

DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09897-4

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().