Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26408404›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2015

Barriers to hospital and tuberculosis programme collaboration in China: context matters.

Guanyang Zou, Rebecca King, John Walley, Jia Yin, Qiang Sun, Xiaolin Wei

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 1 country.

Guanyang ZouChina Programme, COMDIS Health Services Delivery Research Consortium, University of Leeds, Shenzhen, China.
Rebecca KingNuffield Centre for International Health and Development, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
John WalleyNuffield Centre for International Health and Development, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jia YinDevision of Health System, Policy and Management, School of Public Health and Primary Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Qiang SunCentre for Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Xiaolin WeiDevision of Health System, Policy and Management, School of Public Health and Primary Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; xiaolinwei@cuhk.edu.hk.
Nuffield Health · GBQueen Margaret University · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many developing countries, programmes for 'diseases of social importance', such as tuberculosis (TB), have traditionally been organised as vertical services. In most of China, general hospitals are required to report and refer suspected TB cases to the TB programme for standardised diagnosis and treatment. General hospitals are the major contacts of health services for the TB patients. Despite the implementation of public-public/private mix, directly observed treatment, short-course, TB reporting and referral still remain a challenge.

objectiveThis study aims to identify barriers to the collaboration between the TB programme and general hospitals in China.

designThis is a qualitative study conducted in two purposefully selected counties in China: one in Zhejiang, a more affluent eastern province, and another in Guangxi, a poorer southwest province. Sixteen in-depth interviews were conducted and triangulated with document review and field notes. An open systems perspective, which views organisations as social systems, was adopted.

resultsThe most perceived problem appeared to be untimely reporting and referral associated with non-standardised prescriptions and hospitalisation by the general hospitals. These problems could be due to the financial incentives of the general hospitals, poor supervision from the TB programme to general hospitals, and lack of technical support from the TB programme to the general hospitals. However, contextual factors, such as different funding natures of different organisations, the prevalent medical and relationship cultures, and limited TB funding, could constrain the processes of collaboration between the TB programme and the general hospitals.

conclusionsThe challenges in the TB programme and general hospital collaboration are rooted in the context. Improving collaboration should reduce the potential mistrust of the two organisations by aligning their interests, improving training, and improving supervision of TB control in the hospitals. In particular, effective regulatory mechanisms are crucial to alleviate the negative impact of the contextual factors and ensure smooth collaboration.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorHospital AdministrationChinaDirectly Observed TherapyGlobal HealthHealth Plan ImplementationHumansInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchReferral and ConsultationTuberculosiscollaborationgeneral hospitalsopen systemstuberculosis programme

Identifiers

PMID26408404
PMCPMC4583609
OpenAlexW2101842639

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.