| Literature DB >> 18945338 |
Bas Vanmeulebrouk1, Ulrike Rivett, Adam Ricketts, Melissa Loudon.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reliable access to basic services can improve a community's resilience to HIV/AIDS. Accordingly, work is being done to upgrade the physical infrastructure in affected areas, often employing a strategy of decentralised service provision. Spatial characteristics are one of the major determinants in implementing services, even in the smaller municipal areas, and good quality spatial information is needed to inform decision making processes. However, limited funds, technical infrastructure and human resource capacity result in little or no access to spatial information for crucial infrastructure development decisions at local level.This research investigated whether it would be possible to develop a GIS for basic infrastructure planning and management at local level. Given the resource constraints of the local government context, particularly in small municipalities, it was decided that open source software should be used for the prototype system.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18945338 PMCID: PMC2584066 DOI: 10.1186/1476-072X-7-53
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Health Geogr ISSN: 1476-072X Impact factor: 3.918
Specifications of PC used during performance tests
| Operating system | Windows XP Professional |
| CPU | Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz |
| RAM | 512 MB |
Data used during performance tests
| Number of features | |
| Provinces | 9 |
| Municipalities | 30 |
| Sub-councils | 28 |
| Sub-places | 796 |
Summary of user profile of participants in usability analysis
| Sample size | 30 | 100 |
| Clinics | 7 | 23,33 |
| Community | 4 | 13,33 |
| Convenience | 10 | 33,33 |
| Municipality | 9 | 30 |
| Coding | 4 | 13,33 |
| Internet | 17 | 56,67 |
| Word-processing | 9 | 30 |
| High school | 5 | 16,67 |
| Tertiary | 25 | 83,33 |
| Female | 18 | 60 |
| Male | 12 | 40 |
| 20–29 | 10 | 33,33 |
| 30–39 | 6 | 20 |
| 40–49 | 10 | 33,33 |
| 50–59 | 4 | 13,33 |
Figure 1Components of the GIS prototype. The prototype system was developed as a series of components. End-users access the system by logging in to the internet GIS client. The internet GIS client connects to the internet GIS server. The internet GIS server contains all of the application logic. It was developed in Java. MapScript, the scripting language for MapServer, was used to implement the GIS functionality. The spatial data are stored in a PostGIS spatial database. PostGIS is the spatial extension to the PostgreSQL relational database management system. Administrators use a desktop GIS application (for instance uDig) to manage the spatial database.
Figure 2Screenshot of the internet GIS client. End-users access the system by logging in to the internet GIS client. The client runs inside a web browser, as illustrated, and requires no additional software or plug-ins.
Figure 3Average response times application server. This graph shows the average response time of the application server in milliseconds for a given number of concurrent users. These users have been simulated using Apache JMeter. Between 0 and 25 concurrent users, the average response time hardly increases. With more than 25 users, the average response time starts to increase. This is caused by a queue of requests which increases. This indicates the system is capable of handling 25 concurrent users.
Summary of results of usability analysis.
| Sample | 3.27 (0.47–8) | 0.83 (0.1–2) | 2.44 | 68.50 (35–97.5) |
| Clinics | 3.24 (1.6–5) | 1.16 (0.8 – 1.5) | 2.09 | 64.64 (55–72.5) |
| Community | 5.63 (2.5–8) | 1.23 (0.9–2) | 4.40 | 46.88 (35–75) |
| Convenience | 1.83 (0.47–3) | 0.32 (0.1–1.12) | 1.51 | 78.75 (45–97.5) |
| Municipality | 3.83 (2–6) | 0.95 (0.45–1.6) | 2.89 | 69.72 (62.5–85) |
| Coding | 2.92 (1.16–5) | 0.75 (0.1–1) | 2.17 | 66.88 (35–95) |
| Internet | 2.93 (0.47–5) | 0.63 (0.15–1.4) | 2.30 | 72.06 (45–97.5) |
| Word-processing | 4.07 (1.6–8) | 1.23 (0.45–2) | 2.84 | 62.50 (35–72.5) |
| High school | 4.90 (2–8) | 1.33 (1–2) | 3.58 | 56.50 (35–72.5) |
| Tertiary | 2.94 (0.47–6) | 0.73 (0.1–1.6) | 2.22 | 70.90 (35–97.5) |
| Female | 2.95 (0.47–7) | 0.87 (0.1–2) | 2.08 | 66.53 (35–97.5) |
| Male | 3.75 (0.5–8) | 0.76 (0.2–1.6) | 2.99 | 71.46 (42.5–92.5) |
| 20–29 | 2.52 (0.47–8) | 0.39 (0.1–1) | 2.13 | 72.75 (42.5–95) |
| 30–39 | 4.29 (1.6–7) | 1.21 (0.25–2) | 3.08 | 67.50 (35–97.5) |
| 40–49 | 3.51 (1.6–5) | 1.02 (0.45–1.5) | 2.49 | 64.50 (35–75) |
| 50–59 | 3.00 (2–5) | 0.88 (0.5–1) | 2.13 | 69.38 (55–85) |
The table shows the average time taken to complete task one and task two, the difference in the average time taken to complete task one and two and the average SUS. The range (minimum and maximum) of these indicators is shown between brackets.
Sample characteristics versus user group
| Clinics | 7 | 46 | 0 | 100 | |
| Community | 4 | 36 | 50 | 50 | |
| Convenience | 10 | 27 | 30 | 70 | |
| Municipality | 9 | 42 | 77.78 | 22.22 | |
| Sample | 30 | 37 | 40 | 60 | |
| Clinics | 57.14 | 42.86 | 0 | 28.57 | 71.43 |
| Community | 50 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 50 |
| Convenience | 10 | 80 | 10 | 10 | 90 |
| Municipality | 33.33 | 55.56 | 11.11 | 0 | 100 |
| Sample | 33.33 | 53.33 | 13.33 | 16.67 | 83.33 |
Summary of usability testing post test interview results, user group communities/clinics.
| Should GIS be used by communities | • Yes, but concerns over how it may work | • Yes |
| • Yes, through NGO's | • Knowledge about local conditions | |
| • Yes very interested | • They need all the help they can get | |
| • Yes, in libraries | ||
| • Yes, real estate | ||
| Benefits – municipality | • Budgeting • Information | • Planning • Knowledge of facilities |
| • Awareness | • Understanding of services by community | |
| • May pose problems, but should be beneficial | • Understanding of local conditions | |
| • Less phone calls | • Identification of problems | |
| • Relief on municipal staff | • Home based carer management | |
| • Updated data | ||
| • Communication with municipalities | ||
| • Informed decisions | ||
| • Co-operation | ||
| • Local knowledge | ||
| • Self governance | ||
| Benefits – community | • Information availability | • Better living conditions |
| • Transparency of government information | • Service improvements | |
| • improved contribution to planning and development Understanding of planning and priorities | • Insight | |
| • Better informed | • Engage with municipalities and challenge their decisions | |
| • Information accessibility | • Upliftment | |
| • Knowledge | • Education | |
| • Ability to articulate needs | ||
| • Preparation for community meetings | ||
| Hinder | • Skills | • Computer literacy |
| • Political parties | • No access to internet | |
| • Resources | • Knowledge | |
| • Cost | • Understanding | |
| • Facilities | • Misuse | |
| • Access to resources | • Skills | |
| • Resources | • Resources | |
| • Distribution | • Map reading | |
| • Accessibility | • Computer literacy | |
| • Management | ||
| General impression | • Positive, but with reservations | • Good, happy to be involved in the development |
| • Positive, but will need facilitation | • Promising | |
| • Could be of benefit | • Good, Creating awareness and sharing knowledge | |
| • Positive, there is a need for mechanisms such as this | • Good, but needs to be simplified | |
| • Positive, understanding and awareness | • Positive | |
| • Generally positive | ||
Repetitive answers have been omitted