Research in Action: In Conversation with P K Latha
Integrating action anchored in critical reflection with research fosters a dynamic cycle of improvement and meaningful impact. Our dedicated team at Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER) have successfully piloted a new digital data collection tool in the field, drastically cutting down the time and effort involved. In this compelling interview with Sarah Iqbal, P K Latha shares her insights on the strategic necessity of the tool’s development and relates her firsthand experience bringing it to life.
Could you share a few details about your work and the significance of survey data in your research?
Our research was driven by the urgent need to understand how Heat Action Plans (HAPs) are being effectively executed in real-world scenarios. We examined three critical phases—before summer, during summer, and after summer—when these plans are vital towards safeguarding health. Our study focused on two strategically chosen districts in Andhra Pradesh, Srikakulam and Parvathipuram Manyam, regions where temperatures are known to rise significantly. By examining the deployment of HAPs at the community level, within Primary Health Centers, and across workplaces, we aimed to uncover the strengths and challenges of these initiatives.
We conducted a thorough analysis to pinpoint the limitations in the current Heat Action Plan (HAP) system, asking the critical questions: “What’s working and what isn’t?” However, we didn’t stop there.
We reached out directly to the communities to truly understand their lived experiences. We aimed to hear their personal stories and grasp the realities they face. Are they aware of heat-related illnesses (HRIs)? Are they taking proactive steps to protect themselves? Most importantly, do they know that these Heat Action Plans exist, and have they benefited from any interventions during the three critical time points we examined?
By engaging with the communities, we wanted to ensure that our findings lead to meaningful change and better outcomes for those at risk.
What motivated the transition to digital data collection?
We conducted a survey at three different time points to document the experiences of the study participants. Initially, we considered using paper-based methods, as we had done in previous projects. However, this study was different; it was longitudinal, meaning we needed to revisit the same individuals at three separate moments in time.
Given the study’s design, paper-based data collection proved to be impractical. Mapping individual responses across the three waves on pen and paper would have been extremely challenging and prone to errors, risking the loss of the ability to track how each participant’s experience changed over time. The digital platform allowed us to assign unique participant IDs that automatically connected individual responses across all three survey time points. It ensured that the team didn’t lose considerable time, eliminating the need to sift through numerous forms to find corresponding values for each participant. While ensuring that the entire process was more reliable, efficient, and accurate.
Image curated during field research
Were there challenges when collecting data through digital methods? Or was it smooth sailing?
We used two different platforms for our data collection: REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) for workplace-level data and SMARThealth for community-level data. With REDCap, we collected data through traditional methods and then transferred it into the REDCap platform. We used the SMARThealth digital platform in the initial stages for real-time, on-site data collection at the community level.
We realized quickly that we needed to build a data dictionary or codebook for the digital platform.
How did you create or build these data dictionaries?
We created three distinct codebooks for the surveys at each time point. Building on the templates designed by the digital team, the researchers took on the task of coding themselves.
What was the experience of coding like? What is a challenge?
Coding was no small feat. Our surveys were intricately designed, featuring numerous skip logic sequences and interconnected questions. Each question had to be meticulously coded to guide participants to relevant follow-ups based on their answers. The iterative nature of this process was crucial, as we aimed for seamless consistency across all three versions of the survey while ensuring that participants were neither asked irrelevant questions nor were critical data points overlooked.
Training the field teams came next. Accustomed to traditional paper forms, the transition to digital forms on electronic tablets understandably necessitated a fair amount of guidance and support. Network connectivity also proved a challenge with certain regions where the field research was being conducted lacking adequate coverage.
We partnered with the SMARThealth team to enable offline data collection and syncing. This collaboration was a game changer, allowing our field teams to collect data without a signal and easily upload it later. Through a rigorous development and testing process, the SMARThealth team succeeded in creating a powerful digital survey tool capable of capturing the complex, longitudinal data essential for our HAP effectiveness analysis. This innovative solution not only enhanced our research capabilities but also ensured that we gain critical insights necessary to drive impactful outcomes.
How challenging was it for you to put this into practice? What insights can you share to help other teams effectively navigate this transition?
We kicked off the process with comprehensive training sessions for our field staff, ensuring that new data collectors were paired with seasoned professionals fluent in the local language, Telugu. This mentorship not only facilitated smoother operations but also fostered a sense of community that strengthened our team.
During the trial phase, I prioritized maintaining close communication with both the data collectors and the tech team, especially during field visits.
This collaboration was key; by addressing issues as they arose, we maximized our efficiency and effectiveness. Moreover, our commitment to open communication between the field and the tech team accelerated our troubleshooting process tremendously. The presence of developers and researchers on-site was invaluable, enabling us to tackle challenges head-on and swiftly bring the system to full operational capacity. Our teamwork not only enhanced our workflow but also laid a solid foundation for future success.
Image curated during field research
How impactful and transformative was the transition period?
The transition period proved to be extensive, with the development of our first tool taking approximately six months. This was our initial foray into such a project, and while we faced several challenges, those hurdles ultimately paved the way for greater efficiency in our later undertakings. Through an iterative learning process and hands-on experience in crafting a data dictionary, we significantly streamlined the development of subsequent tools. Each lesson learned through trial and error, particularly in the creation of the data dictionary, became a stepping stone for our progress. We meticulously documented our journey and formulated a concise Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for data dictionary development.
By the time we transitioned to developing the next set of tools, our SOP was ready, dramatically reducing the development time and smoothing the process.
What do you hope to take away from this process of transition into digital data collection?
Looking ahead, we are excited to leverage the insights we’ve gathered to create a standardized, user-friendly SOP and develop quick training modules. This proactive approach will empower us to onboard new data collectors swiftly and effectively. By applying these refined processes during our intervention phase tool development, we aim to enhance our efficiency and ensure positive impact.
Infectious in her enthusiasm, rigorous in research, and committed to creating impactful positive change, Latha and her team embody the principles of consistent analysis, reflection, and growth. We, at NIHR Global Health Research Centre for Non-communicable Diseases and Environmental Change, look forward to supporting Latha as she grows from strength to strength.
Know more about NIHR Global Health Research Centre for Non-communicable Diseases and Environmental Change and its collaboration with Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research here…
About P K Latha – P.K. Latha is a NIHR New Research Leader at Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), with a specialized focus on occupational heat research. With over ten years of dedicated experience, Latha possesses deep expertise in epidemiological studies that examine thermal conditions, and innovative passive cooling technologies to combat heat risks and non-communicable diseases caused by heat. Her research addresses the critical issues of heat stress related to workload, dehydration, and renal health. A prolific contributor to her field, Latha has co-authored numerous impactful articles and review papers. Explore her publications in full here…
About the editors:
Sarah Iqbal- Sarah is the Research Manager at the George Institute for Global Health, India. She also spearheads the knowledge management at the NIHR Global Health Research Centre for Non-communicable Diseases and Environmental Change. A PhD in Biochemistry and with over three years of experience as a research manager, Sarah Iqbal works closely with researchers and the communications team.
Neha Sen- Neha is the Communications Officer at the NIHR Global Health Research Centre for Non-communicable Diseases and Environmental Change. She provides editorial and communications support, working closely with researchers and the knowledge management team.
This research was funded by the NIHR (Global Health Research Centre for Non-communicable Diseases and Environmental Change) using UK international development funding from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK government.
