Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24331715›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2013

Building sustainable organizational capacity to deliver HIV programs in resource-constrained settings: stakeholder perspectives.

Anjali Sharma, Philippe Chiliade, E Michael Reyes, Kate K Thomas, Stephen R Collens, José Rafael Morales

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anjali SharmaInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Liverpool Associates in Tropical Health (LATH), Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (LSTM), Liverpool, UK; anjalis@uw.edu.
Philippe ChiliadeGlobal HIV/AIDS Program, HIV/AIDS Bureau (HAB), Health Resource and Services Administration (HRSA), USA.
E Michael ReyesInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Kate K ThomasInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Stephen R CollensInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
José Rafael MoralesGlobal HIV/AIDS Program, HIV/AIDS Bureau (HAB), Health Resource and Services Administration (HRSA), USA.
University of Washington · USHealth Resources and Services Administration · USOffice of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology · US

Funding

PHS HHS U91HA06801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2008, the US government mandated that HIV/AIDS care and treatment programs funded by the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) should shift from US-based international partners (IPs) to registered locally owned organizations (local partners, or LPs). The US Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) developed the Clinical Assessment for Systems Strengthening (ClASS) framework for technical assistance in resource-constrained settings. The ClASS framework involves all stakeholders in the identification of LPs' strengths and needs for technical assistance.

objectiveThis article examines the role of ClASS in building capacity of LPs that can endure and adapt to changing financial and policy environments.

designAll stakeholders (n=68) in Kenya, Zambia, and Nigeria who had participated in the ClASS from LPs and IPs, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and, in Nigeria, HIV/AIDS treatment facilities (TFs) were interviewed individually or in groups (n=42) using an open-ended interview guide. Thematic analysis revealed stakeholder perspectives on ClASS-initiated changes and their sustainability.

resultsLocal organizations were motivated to make changes in internal operations with the ClASS approach, PEPFAR's competitive funding climate, organizational goals, and desired patient health outcomes. Local organizations drew on internal resources and, if needed, technical assistance from IPs. Reportedly, ClASS-initiated changes and remedial action plans made LPs more competitive for PEPFAR funding. LPs also attributed their successful funding applications to their preexisting systems and reputation. Bureaucracy, complex and competing tasks, and staff attrition impeded progress toward the desired changes. Although CDC continues to provide technical assistance through IPs, declining PEPFAR funds threaten the consolidation of gains, smooth program transition, and continuity of treatment services.

conclusionsThe well-timed adaptation and implementation of ClASS successfully engaged stakeholders who committed their own resources toward strengthening organizational capacity. The sustainability of built capacity depends on continued investment in leadership, staff retention, and quality improvement.

Indexed as

Capacity BuildingAdultAnti-Retroviral AgentsDelivery of Health CareFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInternational CooperationKenyaMaleMiddle AgedNigeriaOrganizational ObjectivesProgram EvaluationPublic-Private Sector PartnershipsUnited StatesAnti-Retroviral Agentscapacity buildingHIV/AIDSlocal partnerparticipatory assessmentprogram transitiontechnical assistance

Identifiers

PMID24331715
PMCPMC3864159
OpenAlexW2065464720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.