The status quo on existing routine health information management systems that have incorporated key population unique identifier codes in Sub-Saharan Africa: Protocol for systematic review ============================================================================================================================================================================================ * Mashudu Rampilo * Phalane Edith * Paswana-Mafuya Refilwe Nancy ## ABSTRACT **Introduction** Despite having the world’s largest HIV epidemic, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) including South Africa (SA) has not yet achieved the 95-95-95 targets. To meet these targets, accurate and reliable key populations (KPs) disaggregated data is critical for guiding the HIV response. The inclusion of KPs Unique Identifier Code (UIC) on country’s routine health information management systems (RHIMS) can improve targeted resource allocation, reporting, and accountability. There is a gap in comprehensive review on how countries that implemented the unique identifier code went about in doing so. **Methods and analysis** A three-step search strategy will be utilized to get both published and unpublished documents. First, an initial search of MEDLINE identified keywords and MeSH terms. Second, a systematic search of electronic bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, PLOS ONE and Google Scholar, and thirdly, searching the reference list of all included reviews (hand-searching journals and reference tracking). Studies that meet the following PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria will be included: P: Published and unpublished materials reporting on key populations, namely men who have sex with men (MSM), sex workers (SW), people who inject/use drugs (PWI/UD), and transgender (TG); I: biometric fingerprint, alphanumeric code and any KPs UIC system; C: no unique identifier system; and O: KPs-specific 95-95-95 HIV cascade, KPs knowing HIV status, KPs on ART, ART adherence and Viral load suppression. This protocol was prepared using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). References will be managed through ENDNOTE version 21 software. Two authors will screen the studies using Covidence software version 2.0 for inclusion according to the prescribed eligibility criteria. Differences will be addressed by consensus and with the assistance of an experienced third reviewer. **Ethics and dissemination** This review will summarize findings from published studies containing non-identifiable data. The results will be disseminated via preprints, open-access peer-reviewed journals, and conference presentations. **PROSPERO registration number** CRD42023440656 View this table: [Table1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/03/15/2024.03.13.24304231/T1) ## INTRODUCTION Globally, 70% of new Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infections reported in 2021 were among Key Populations (KPs) and their partners [1]. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines KPs as populations who are at higher risk for HIV irrespective of the epidemic type or local context and who face social and legal challenges that increase their vulnerability. They include sex workers (SW), men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender people (TG), people who inject drugs (PWID), and people in prison and other closed settings [2]. In the Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), KPs accounted for 51% of new infections in 2021 [3]. In South Africa (SA), HIV prevalence is estimated at 29.9% among MSM, 45.5-63.4% among TG, 57.9% among SW and 21.8% in PWID [4–6]. Key populations face many social and legal barriers, including stigmatization and discrimination, which challenge their engagement in healthcare and as a result, access to and uptake of health services among KPs remains low and HIV incidences continue to be high [7]. South Africa is among the countries that have committed to achieve the 95-95-95 targets for HIV diagnosis, treatment, and viral suppression to end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030, as set out in the Global AIDS Strategy 2021-2026. To achieve this, there is a critical need for a strong national routine health management information system (RHMIS) capable of disaggregating KPs HIV data for differentiated resource allocation and reporting [8]. Eliminating HIV through addressing the specific needs of KPs in SA will require country ownership of KPs programming and prevention services [9]. Key Populations face what Baral and Greenall described as “The data paradox” wherein decision-makers often deny the existence of the most affected populations and fail to establish systems for data collection, thereby allowing the lack of data to support the denial [10]. High quality, representative data from HIV surveillance systems that have country ownership and commitment are critical for guiding national HIV responses, especially among KPs given their disproportionate role in the transmission of the virus [11]. Key Population specific data are more important than ever to guide the HIV response toward reaching the UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets. However, this data is inadequate due to deficient tracking measures for individuals from facility to facility, due to the absence of KPs UIC. To close this gap, the WHO launched consolidated guidelines on the adoption and implementation of UIC for improved person-centred HIV patient monitoring and case surveillance in 2017 [12]. The implementation of UIC for individuals enrolled in KPs programs holds paramount importance, offering a multifaceted solution to healthcare challenges in the era of 95-95-95 goals and beyond. These identifiers serve to safeguard against duplicate entries, ensuring accurate data collection and resource allocation. They also facilitate comprehensive tracking of individuals across the healthcare spectrum, enabling longitudinal analysis of behaviour changes and healthcare outcomes, while simultaneously enhancing linkage between services and bolstering outcome assessment. These identifiers also play a pivotal role in transitioning from paper-based to electronic patient information systems, aligning healthcare practices with the evolving needs of modern healthcare systems, ensuring the utmost confidentiality and security of individual health information. The inclusion of KPs UIC has been reported in some SSA countries including Kenya, Ghana, Malawi, Burkina Faso and Togo. In Kenya, the National AIDS and STI Control Program (NASCOP) and its stakeholders implemented alphanumeric KPs UICs [13]. The Ghana AIDS Commission (GAC) through the support of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) launched the Ghana Key Population Unique Identifier System (GKPUIS) in 2019 [14]. Malawi uses a simple alphanumeric code to create KPs UIC which is implemented at the sub-national level [15]. The USAID/West Africa Regional Project for the Prevention and Care of HIV / AIDS (PACTE-VIH) implemented KPs UIC in Burkina Faso and Togo [16]. Countries outside SSA which have successfully incorporated KPs UIC into their RHIMS at national level include Georgia, Indonesia, Kosovo, Moldova, Morocco, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan [17]. The prevailing situation in many countries is that different implementing partners, financed by different funders, utilize different KPs UIC formats [18]. Implementing partners utilize diverse information systems sourced from various vendors with different architectures, creating challenges in the exchange of information with government systems [19]. In SA, UIC’s are already being utilised by government-owned systems like TIER.Net and Health Patient Registration System (HPRS), but these UICs do not identify KPs or other marginalised populations [9]. This kind of omission compromises planning, resource allocation, and progress reporting for KPs [20]. The inclusion of KPs UIC in SA RHIMS will assist the country to understand KP-specific programmes performance and allocate resources efficiently to enable the country to reach the ambitious goals to end HIV/AIDS as a public health threat by year 2030 mainly for KPs. ## RESEARCH AIM The overall aim of this literature review is to explore the status quo on existing routine health information management systems that have incorporated key population unique identifier codes in sub-Saharan Africa ## METHODS AND ANALYSIS This systematic review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines to ensure validity and reliability [21], and is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (ID: CRD42023440656). ### Search strategies A comprehensive search of published and grey literature published between 01 March 2014 and 29 February 2024 on the inclusion of KPs UIC in SSA will be conducted using multiple databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, PLOS ONE and Google Scholar). Grey literature will comprise searches of theses, dissertations, formal reports, conference abstracts, presentations, and posters. Furthermore, a manual search of sources and the websites of key multilateral organizations of interest (e.g., PEPFAR, Global Fund, UNAIDS, WHO, and CDC) will be conducted. Table 2 provides the draft search string for PubMed, which will be changed to the search parameters of other databases. A standard search strategy will be used in PubMed and then later modified according to other databases filters. Additional reports will be searched through analysing the papers cited by the authors of the identified studies. View this table: [Table 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/03/15/2024.03.13.24304231/T2) Table 2: Draft search string according to PICO format The search strategy will be validated by a qualified and experienced librarian, who will also assist with finding inaccessible articles. Search results will be exported from search engines and imported into ENDNOTE 21 bibliography manager. The search results will be presented in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) diagram [22]. ### Screening Articles to be included will be screened by two independent reviewers, following the process described in the PRISMA flow diagram [22]. Two reviewers will independently assess each abstract to determine whether full-text review is needed. Full text of potentially eligible studies will be retrieved and reviewed and assessed for final inclusion by two reviewers. Cohen’s kappa will be determined to confirm inter-rater agreement and consistency in the choice of studies to be included [23]. Any disagreement between the two reviewers will be resolved by a more experienced third reviewer. ### Data extraction Data extraction will be carried out independently by two reviewers and reviewed by a third reviewer. For each eligible study, the following items will be extracted: author and year, country, study title, KP, UIC type, level where UIC was incorporated into RHIMS. The content of the two summary tables will then be combined and reviewed yet again by both reviewers, with any disagreements being resolved by a more experienced third reviewer. Summary of selected studies will be presented in data extraction table designed through Covidence data-management software version 2.0. ### Inclusion and exclusion criteria The inclusion criteria will be informed by the PICO statement [24] as outlined in Table 3 below. View this table: [Table 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/03/15/2024.03.13.24304231/T3) Table 3: PICO inclusion criteria ### Quality assessment This protocol will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) Statement. If there is disagreement, a third reviewer will be consulted. Moreover, the assessment of the quality of the studies will be done using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) released in year 2021[25]. The checklist will be completed to examine the validity, precision, and generalizability of the research. Two team members will independently evaluate the complete text and abstract of the qualifying articles using the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as a predetermined and agreed-upon score criterion for each evaluation using Covidence. Studies will be excluded if they perform badly on either of the quality assessment tools. ### Narrative synthesis In this review, all the studies included will be synthesized by critical appraisal and narrative synthesis approaches. This approach will be appropriate because it can be applied in systematic reviews to synthesise findings from multiple studies concentrating primarily on the use of words and text to summarize the results. The analysis will follow 4 elements of nnarrative synthesis: theory development, developing a preliminary synthesis, exploring relationships within and between studies, and assessing the robustness of the synthesis [26]. Narrative synthesis can be used to address a collection of questions concerning the success of interventions, including what works as well as why and how. ### Patient and public involvement The involvement of the public in this systematic review will entail refining the scope, suggesting, and locating relevant literature, assessing the literature, and interpreting the review findings. Qualitative document analysis will be conducted to provide insight on how various official documents recognize KPs HIV data collection and reporting. Documents will be searched from South African government and non-government organization websites. The public will consist of policy actors and managers from various institutions working closely with KPs programme including key population community, policy makers, governments, research community, health information/data managers, health care providers, civil society organizations, private sector, non-government organisations (NGO’s), International & local funders, and political leaders. ### Amendments All modifications to this protocol will be documented, referencing saved searches and analysis methods. These will be recorded in bibliographic databases, ENDNOTE, and Excel templates designed for data collection and synthesis. ## DISCUSSION This review will be conducted as the first part of the doctoral research which aims to review grey and published literature to understand how other Sub-Saharan African countries that have included KPs UIC on their RHIMS. The primary goal of the study is to identify and describe these interventions and to also highlights some key points on their barriers, facilitators, feasibility, affordability, and sustainability. The search strategy will be limited to include studies and reports published between 01 March 2014 and 29 February 2024. This review will exclude systematic reviews and focus primarily on primary studies and government reports. Our results are intended to programme managers and policymakers on the effectiveness including KPs UIC on RHIMS. South Africa’s national HIV response is outlined by its National Strategic Plan for HIV, TB, and STIs (NSP 2023-2028), which emphasizes the significance of an all-inclusive HIV response which addresses the prevention and treatment requirements for key and vulnerable populations [27]. It will be crucial for South African National AIDS Council (SANAC) to utilise the results of this planned systematic review to take a leadership role in ensuring the inclusion of KPs UIC in the government’s RHIM using lessons learnt from other SSA countries. South Africa is also the process of establishing the National Health Insurance (NHI), which aims to enhance the accessibility of high-quality healthcare services for every SA citizen and to fulfil this goal, there is a need to establish an electronic health record (EHR) system that can register and monitor patients across various healthcare providers, which can also have KP data disaggregation [28]. Furthermore, for future recommendations, our work will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and to the local stakeholders. ## Data Availability Data will be made available upon request made to the corresponding author ## ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study proposal was approved at the University of Johannesburg (UJ) Higher Degrees Committee (HDC) and UJ Research Ethics Committee (REC) approval (REC-2518-2023). The protocol adheres to the PRISMA Protocols guidelines. Results will be disseminated via preprints, peer-reviewed publications, and conference presentations. ## Author contributions MR conceived and designed the study. MR drafted the manuscript and drafted the search strategy with the assistance of the librarian. MR, EP, and RPM carefully reviewed the protocol. All authors read and approved the final manuscript as submitted and agreed to be responsible for all aspects of the work. ## Funding The authors R.P.M and E.P are supported by the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) through its Division of Research Capacity Development under the Mid-Career Scientist Programme using funding received from the South African National Treasury. This work is conducted under the auspices of the SAMRC/University of Johannesburg (UJ) Pan African Centre for Epidemics Research Extramural Unit. The content hereof is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the SAMRC or UJ. ## Competing interests None declared. ## Patient consent for publication Not required. ## Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Librarian (Ms. Dorcas Dikomo Rathaba) at University of Johannesburg for her support and guidance provided to formulate search terms and the overall search strategy. * Received March 13, 2024. * Revision received March 13, 2024. * Accepted March 15, 2024. * © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ## REFERENCES 1. 1.Moyo E, Moyo P, Murewanhema G, Mhango M, Chitungo I, Dzinamarira T. Key populations and Sub-Saharan Africa’s HIV response. Front Public Health. 2023;11. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1079990. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fpubh.2023.1079990&link_type=DOI) 2. 2.World Health Organization (WHO). Focus on key populations in national HIV strategic plans in the WHO African Region. 2018 [https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-AF-CDS-HIV-02-2018](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-AF-CDS-HIV-02-2018). Accessed 4 September 2023. 3. 3.Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). The path that ends AIDS:UNAIDS Global AIDS Update 2023. 2023. Geneva [https://thepath.unaids.org/wp-content/themes/unaids2023/assets/files/2023_report.pdf](https://thepath.unaids.org/wp-content/themes/unaids2023/assets/files/2023_report.pdf). Accessed 29 September 2023. 4. 4.Evans MGB, Cloete A, Zungu N, Simbayi LC. HIV Risk Among Men Who Have Sex With Men, Women Who Have Sex With Women, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Populations in South Africa: A Mini-Review. Open AIDS J. 2016;10(1):49–64. 5. 5.Cloete A, Wabiri;, Savva;, Van Der Merwe;, Simbayi; The Botshelo Ba Trans Study Results of the first HIV prevalence survey conducted amongst transgender women (TGW) in South Africa. 2019. 6. 6.Scheibe A, Makapela D, Brown B, dos Santos M, Hariga F, Virk H, et al. HIV prevalence and risk among people who inject drugs in five South African cities. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2016;30. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.01.004. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.01.004&link_type=DOI) 7. 7.Kavanagh MM, Agbla SC, Joy M, Aneja K, Pillinger M, Case A, et al. Law, criminalisation and HIV in the world: have countries that criminalise achieved more or less successful pandemic response? BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(8):1–8. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F03%2F15%2F2024.03.13.24304231.atom) 8. 8.Assefa Y, Gilks CF, Dean J, Tekle B, Lera M, Balcha TT, et al. Towards achieving the fast-track targets and ending the epidemic of HIV/AIDS in Ethiopia: Successes and challenges. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2019;78. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2018.10.022. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijid.2018.10.022&link_type=DOI) 9. 9.Phaswana-Mafuya RN, Phalane E, Sisel H, Motsieloa L, Journeay K, Dubula V, et al. Country ownership and sustainable programming of the HIV response in South Africa: A scoping review. Southern African Journal of HIV Medicine. 2023;24(1). doi:10.4102/SAJHIVMED.V24I1.1511. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4102/SAJHIVMED.V24I1.1511&link_type=DOI) 10. 10.Baral S, Greenall M. The data Paradox. [https://wherethereisnodata.wordpress.com/2013/07/05/the-data-paradox/](https://wherethereisnodata.wordpress.com/2013/07/05/the-data-paradox/). Accessed 20 November 2023. 11. 11.Semá Baltazar C, Boothe M, Chitsondzo Langa D, Sathane I, Horth R, Young P, et al. Recognizing the hidden: strengthening the HIV surveillance system among key and priority populations in Mozambique. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):91. 12. 12.World Health Organization (WHO). Consolidated guidelines on person-centred HIV patient monitoring and case surveillance. WHO. 2017;(June). 13. 13.National AIDS and STIs control programme (NASCOP). Unique Identifier code for Key Population Programmes in Kenya. 2015. NASCOP [https://www.childrenandaids.org/node/628](https://www.childrenandaids.org/node/628). Accessed 17 August 2023. 14. 14.Ghana Aids Commission (GAC). National HIV & AIDS strategic plan 2021-2025. 2020 [https://www.ghanaids.gov.gh/mcadmin/Uploads/GAC%20NSP%202021-2025%20Final%20PDF(4).pdf](https://www.ghanaids.gov.gh/mcadmin/Uploads/GAC%20NSP%202021-2025%20Final%20PDF(4).pdf). Accessed 16 January 2024. 15. 15.Rucinski K, Masankha Banda L, Olawore O, Akolo C, Zakaliya A, Chilongozi D, et al. HIV Testing Approaches to Optimize Prevention and Treatment for Key and Priority Populations in Malawi. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(4). doi:10.1093/ofid/ofac038. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ofid/ofac038&link_type=DOI) 16. 16.Harkaway N. Unique Identifier Code for KP: Anonymity, precision and mobility. 2019 [https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-pacte-vih-identifier-code.pdf](https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-pacte-vih-identifier-code.pdf). 17. 17.Ewing W, Zadrozny S. Unique identifier codes guidelines for use with key populations. 2016 [https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-linkages-uic-guidance.pdf](https://www.fhi360.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/resource-linkages-uic-guidance.pdf). Accessed 17 August 2023. 18. 18.Zhao J, Garcia SA, Ngoksin E, Calleja JMG, Ogbuanu C, Kuzmanovska S, et al. Are monitoring and evaluation systems adequate to report the programmatic coverage of HIV services among key populations in countries? Infect Dis Poverty. 2019;8(1). doi:10.1186/s40249-019-0570-4. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s40249-019-0570-4&link_type=DOI) 19. 19.Zharima C, Griffiths F, Goudge J. Exploring the barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records in a middle-income country: a qualitative study from South Africa. Front Digit Health. 2023;5. doi:10.3389/fdgth.2023.1207602. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fdgth.2023.1207602&link_type=DOI) 20. 20.Mishra S, Boily MC, Schwartz S, Beyrer C, Blanchard JF, Moses S, et al. Data and methods to characterize the role of sex work and to inform sex work programs in generalized HIV epidemics: evidence to challenge assumptions. Annals of Epidemiology. 2016;26(8):557–569. 21. 21.Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Revista Espanola de Nutricion Humana y Dietetica. 2016;20(2). doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-1. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/2046-4053-4-1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25554246&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F03%2F15%2F2024.03.13.24304231.atom) 22. 22.Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ. 2021;372. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE1OiIzNzIvbWFyMjlfMi9uNzEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wMy8xNS8yMDI0LjAzLjEzLjI0MzA0MjMxLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 23. 23.Pérez J, Díaz J, Garcia-Martin J, Tabuenca B. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—enhancement of the study selection process using Cohen’s Kappa statistic. xJournal of Systems and Software. 2020;168. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2020.110657. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jss.2020.110657&link_type=DOI) 24. 24.Eriksen MB, Frandsen TF. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: A systematic review. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2018;106(4). doi:10.5195/jmla.2018.345. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.5195/jmla.2018.345&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F03%2F15%2F2024.03.13.24304231.atom) 25. 25.Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. CASP (Qualitative) Checklist. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. 2021. 26. 26.Rai HK, Barroso AC, Yates L, Schneider J, Orrell M. Involvement of People with Dementia in the Development of Technology-Based Interventions: Narrative Synthesis Review and Best Practice Guidelines. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2020;22(12). doi:10.2196/17531. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2196/17531&link_type=DOI) 27. 27.South African National AIDS Council (SANAC). National strategic plan for HIV, TB and STIs: 2023-2028. 2023 [https://sanac.org.za/national-strategic-plan-2023-2028/](https://sanac.org.za/national-strategic-plan-2023-2028/). Accessed 6 September 2023. 28. 28.Katurura MC, Cilliers L. Electronic health record system in the public health care sector of South Africa: A systematic literature review. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2018;10(1). doi:10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1746. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1746&link_type=DOI)