Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24079992›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2013

The PROCESS study: a protocol to evaluate the implementation, mechanisms of effect and context of an intervention to enhance public health centres in Tororo, Uganda.

Clare I R Chandler, Deborah DiLiberto, Susan Nayiga, Lilian Taaka, Christine Nabirye, Miriam Kayendeke, Eleanor Hutchinson, James Kizito, Catherine Maiteki-Sebuguzi, Moses R Kamya and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01024426 (Evaluating the Impact of Enhanced Health Facility-based Care for Malaria and Febrile Illnesses in Children in Tororo, Uganda), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01024426 phase4completednot on this map

Evaluating the Impact of Enhanced Health Facility-based Care for Malaria and Febrile Illnesses in Children in Tororo, Uganda

TypeinterventionalSponsorUganda Malaria Surveillance ProjectRan2010 to 2013Enrolled25,000ConditionsMalariaArmsEnhanced health facility-based care, Standard care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Clare I R ChandlerDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH, London, UK. clare.chandler@lshtm.ac.uk.
Deborah DiLiberto
Susan Nayiga
Lilian Taaka
Christine Nabirye
Miriam Kayendeke
Eleanor Hutchinson
James Kizito
Catherine Maiteki-Sebuguzi
Moses R Kamya
Sarah G Staedke

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite significant investments into health improvement programmes in Uganda, health indicators and access to healthcare remain poor across the country. The PRIME trial aims to evaluate the impact of a complex intervention delivered in public health centres on health outcomes of children and management of malaria in rural Uganda. The intervention consists of four components: Health Centre Management; Fever Case Management; Patient- Centered Services; and support for supplies of malaria diagnostics and antimalarial drugs.

methodsThe PROCESS study will use mixed methods to evaluate the processes, mechanisms of change, and context of the PRIME intervention by addressing five objectives. First, to develop a comprehensive logic model of the intervention, articulating the project's hypothesised pathways to trial outcomes. Second, to evaluate the implementation of the intervention, including health worker training, health centre management tools, and the supply of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria. Third, to understand mechanisms of change of the intervention components, including testing hypotheses and interpreting realities of the intervention, including resistance, in context. Fourth, to develop a contextual record over time of factors that may have affected implementation of the intervention, mechanisms of change, and trial outcomes, including factors at population, health centre and district levels. Fifth, to capture broader expected and unexpected impacts of the intervention and trial activities among community members, health centre workers, and private providers. Methods will include intervention logic mapping, questionnaires, recorded consultations, in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and contextual data documentation. DISCUSSION: The findings of this PROCESS study will be interpreted alongside the PRIME trial results. This will enable a greater ability to generalise the findings of the main trial. The investigators will attempt to assess which methods are most informative in such evaluations of complex interventions in low-resource settings.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT01024426.

Indexed as

Public Health AdministrationQuality ImprovementHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Status IndicatorsHumansMalariaModels, StatisticalPatient-Centered CareProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchRural Health ServicesSurveys and QuestionnairesUganda

Identifiers

PMID24079992
PMCPMC3849653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.