Back

Co-creating data science solutions for maternal and child health decision-making in tribal primary health centres: an action research using the Three Co's Framework

Mitra, A.; Jayaraman, G.; Ondopu, B.; Malisetty, S. K.; Niranjan, R.; Shaik, S.; Soman, B.; Gaitonde, R.; Bhatnagar, T.; Niehaus, E.; K.S, S.; Roy, A.

2026-03-31 public and global health
10.64898/2026.03.29.26349643 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Digital health tools are increasingly promoted for strengthening health information systems in low- and middle-income countries, yet routine maternal and child health (MCH) data in tribal primary health centres (PHCs) in India remains underutilised for local decision-making. Top-down digital tools often fail in low-resource settings because they are designed without meaningful input from end-users. Co-creation approaches for digital health in tribal and indigenous settings are largely unexplored. Methods: We conducted an action research study in three tribal PHCs under the Integrated Tribal Development Agency (ITDA), Rampachodavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. We applied the Three Co's Framework (Co-Define, Co-Design, Co-Refine) to co-create data science solutions for MCH decision-making with five medical officers, 24 auxiliary nurse midwives, and 36 accredited social health activists across two action research cycles (August 2023 to August 2024). Co-creation involved collaborative indicator definition, data modelling, data quality validation, health facility catchment area construction, spatial analysis, and interactive dashboard development. Keller's Data Science Framework was employed using R to structure the analytical pipeline, and Data.org's Data Maturity Assessment (DMA) was used to assess organisational data maturity pre- and post-intervention. Findings: During Co-Define, co-creators identified a fundamental mismatch between system outputs (aggregate statistics for upward reporting) and their operational need for individual-level, geographically disaggregated, prospective information. Co-Design produced five interconnected data science solutions: (1) 42 co-defined MCH indicators grounded in clinical workflows; (2) a data model linking individuals, health services, providers, and facilities; (3) a data quality framework using the pointblank R package; (4) health facility catchment area boundaries constructed from scratch using medical officers' local knowledge, enabling spatial analysis that revealed significant clustering of ANC coverage and anaemia prevalence; and (5) an R Shiny dashboard integrating these solutions into an offline-capable interface with lifecycle-organised views and village-level navigation. The DMA showed moderate improvement in organisational data maturity from 5.04 to 5.75 out of 10, with the largest gain in Analysis (+1.90). Co-Refine continued beyond the formal study period, with two transferred medical officers maintaining analytical engagement from new postings. Interpretation: The Three Co's Framework, combined with a data science approach, provided a structured yet flexible method for co-creating locally relevant data science solutions in a tribal setting. The framework's explicit separation of problem definition from solution design was particularly valuable in a context where "the problem" is typically defined externally. Co-creation in tribal digital health settings is feasible and produces solutions that address locally articulated needs.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.9%
2
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
22.5%
3
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 36%
4.0%
5
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
6
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.1%
7
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
9
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
10
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 42%
1.7%
11
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
12
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
13
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
15
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.1%
17
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
19
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
20
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
21
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
22
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
26
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.6%