MLCMS actual use, perceived use, and experiences of use

Mobile learning involves use of mobile devices to participate in learning activities. Most elearning activities are available to participants through learning systems such as learning content management systems (LCMS). Due to certain challenges, LCMS are not equally accessible on all mobile devices. This study investigates actual use, perceived usefulness and user experiences of LCMS use on mobile phones at Makerere University in Uganda. The study identifies challenges pertaining to use and discusses how to improve LCMS use on mobile phones. Such solutions are a cornerstone in enabling and improving mobile learning. Data was collected by means of focus group discussions, an online survey designed based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and LCMS log files of user activities. Data was collected from two courses where Moodle was used as a learning platform. The results indicate positive attitudes towards use of LCMS on phones but also huge challenges whichare content related and technical in nature.

Knowledge translation in Uganda : a qualitative study of Ugandan midwives' and managers' perceived relevance of the sub-elements of the context cornerstone in the PARIHS framework

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of the annual 3.3 million neonatal deaths could be averted if there was a high uptake of basic evidence-based practices. In order to overcome this 'know-do' gap, there is an urgent need for in-depth understanding of knowledge translation (KT). A major factor to consider in the successful translation of knowledge into practice is the influence of organizational context. A theoretical framework highlighting this process is Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS). However, research linked to this framework has almost exclusively been conducted in high-income countries. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the perceived relevance of the subelements of the organizational context cornerstone of the PARIHS framework, and also whether other factors in the organizational context were perceived to influence KT in a specific low-income setting. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted in a district of Uganda, where focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews were conducted with midwives (n = 18) and managers (n = 5) within the catchment area of the general hospital. The interview guide was developed based on the context sub-elements in the PARIHS framework (receptive context, culture, leadership, and evaluation). Interviews were transcribed verbatim, followed by directed content analysis of the data. RESULTS: The sub-elements of organizational context in the PARIHS framework--i.e., receptive context, culture, leadership, and evaluation--also appear to be relevant in a low-income setting like Uganda, but there are additional factors to consider. Access to resources, commitment and informal payment, and community involvement were all perceived to play important roles for successful KT. CONCLUSIONS: In further development of the context assessment tool, assessing factors for successful implementation of evidence in low-income settings--resources, community involvement, and commitment and informal payment--should be considered for inclusion. For low-income settings, resources are of significant importance, and might be considered as a separate subelement of the PARIHS framework as a whole.