Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26498744›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2015

Behind the scenes of the PRIME intervention: designing a complex intervention to improve malaria care at public health centres in Uganda.

Deborah D DiLiberto, Sarah G Staedke, Florence Nankya, Catherine Maiteki-Sebuguzi, Lilian Taaka, Susan Nayiga, Moses R Kamya, Ane Haaland, Clare I R Chandler

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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Deborah D DiLibertoDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; deborah.diliberto@lshtm.ac.uk.
Sarah G StaedkeDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Florence NankyaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda.
Catherine Maiteki-SebuguziInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda.
Lilian TaakaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda.
Susan NayigaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda.
Moses R KamyaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda.
Ane HaalandInstitute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Clare I R ChandlerDepartment of Global Health & Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Infectious Diseases Research Collaboration · UGLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Uganda, health system challenges limit access to good quality healthcare and contribute to slow progress on malaria control. We developed a complex intervention (PRIME), which was designed to improve quality of care for malaria at public health centres.

objectiveResponding to calls for increased transparency, we describe the PRIME intervention's design process, rationale, and final content and reflect on the choices and challenges encountered during the design of this complex intervention.

designTo develop the intervention, we followed a multistep approach, including the following: 1) formative research to identify intervention target areas and objectives; 2) prioritization of intervention components; 3) review of relevant evidence; 4) development of intervention components; 5) piloting and refinement of workshop modules; and 6) consolidation of the PRIME intervention theories of change to articulate why and how the intervention was hypothesized to produce desired outcomes. We aimed to develop an intervention that was evidence-based, grounded in theory, and appropriate for the study context; could be evaluated within a randomized controlled trial; and had the potential to be scaled up sustainably.

resultsThe process of developing the PRIME intervention package was lengthy and dynamic. The final intervention package consisted of four components: 1) training in fever case management and use of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (mRDTs); 2) workshops in health centre management; 3) workshops in patient-centred services; and 4) provision of mRDTs and antimalarials when stocks ran low.

conclusionsThe slow and iterative process of intervention design contrasted with the continually shifting study context. We highlight the considerations and choices made at each design stage, discussing elements we included and why, as well as those that were ultimately excluded. Reflection on and reporting of 'behind the scenes' accounts of intervention design may improve the design, assessment, and generalizability of complex interventions and their evaluations.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesHealth Planning OrganizationsHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInservice TrainingMalariaPatient-Centered CarePublic HealthQuality ImprovementUgandacomplex interventionhealth centre managementhealth workerintervention designmalariapatient-centred servicesquality of carerapid diagnostic teststheory of changetraining

Identifiers

PMID26498744
PMCPMC4620687
OpenAlexW1783564084

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.