Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27283191›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2016

Clinicians' knowledge and practices regarding family planning and intrauterine devices in China, Kazakhstan, Laos and Mexico.

Steven J Hoffman, G Emmanuel Guindon, John N Lavis, Harkanwal Randhawa, Francisco Becerra-Posada, Boungnong Boupha, Guang Shi, Botagoz S Turdaliyeva, Research to Policy & Practice Study Team

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Steven J HoffmanGlobal Strategy Lab, Centre for Health Law, Policy & Ethics, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, Fauteux Hall, 57 Louis Pasteur Street, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada. steven.hoffman@uottawa.ca.
G Emmanuel GuindonDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
John N LavisDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Harkanwal RandhawaGlobal Strategy Lab, Centre for Health Law, Policy & Ethics, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, Fauteux Hall, 57 Louis Pasteur Street, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.
Francisco Becerra-PosadaPan American Health Organization, Washington, DC, USA.
Boungnong BouphaForeign Affairs Committee and Women's Caucus, Laos National Assembly, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
Guang ShiDemocratic Party of Peasants & Workers in China, Beijing, China.
Botagoz S TurdaliyevaDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Kazakh National Medical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Research to Policy & Practice Study Team
University of Ottawa · CAHamilton Health Sciences · CAHarvard University · USKazakh National Medical University · KZWorld Health Organization Regional Office for the Americas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is widely agreed that the practices of clinicians should be based on the best available research evidence, but too often this evidence is not reliably disseminated to people who can make use of it. This "know-do" gap leads to ineffective resource use and suboptimal provision of services, which is especially problematic in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which face greater resource limitations. Family planning, including intrauterine device (IUD) use, represents an important area to evaluate clinicians' knowledge and practices in order to make improvements.

methodsA questionnaire was developed, tested and administered to 438 individuals in China (n = 115), Kazakhstan (n = 110), Laos (n = 105), and Mexico (n = 108). The participants responded to ten questions assessing knowledge and practices relating to contraception and IUDs, and a series of questions used to determine their individual characteristics and working context. Ordinal logistic regressions were conducted with knowledge and practices as dependent variables.

resultsOverall, a 96 % response rate was achieved (n = 438/458). Only 2.8 % of respondents were able to correctly answer all five knowledge-testing questions, and only 0.9 % self-reported "often" undertaking all four recommended clinical practices and "never" performing the one practice that was contrary to recommendation. Statistically significant factors associated with knowledge scores included: 1) having a masters or doctorate degree; and 2) often reading scientific journals from high-income countries. Significant factors associated with recommended practices included: 1) training in critically appraising systematic reviews; 2) training in the care of patients with IUDs; 3) believing that research performed in their own country is above average or excellent in quality; 4) being based in a facility operated by an NGO; and 5) having the view that higher quality available research is important to improving their work.

conclusionsThis analysis supports previous work emphasizing the need for improved knowledge and practices among clinicians concerning the use of IUDs for family planning. It also identifies areas in which targeted interventions may prove effective. Assessing opportunities for increasing education and training programs for clinicians in research and IUD provision could prove to be particularly effective.

Indexed as

Family Planning ServicesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeIntrauterine DevicesChinaEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansKazakhstanLaosLogistic ModelsMaleMexicoPractice Guidelines as TopicFamily planningGlobal healthHealth human resourcesHealth professionalsHealth systemsIntrauterine deviceKnowledge translationMedical educationSystematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID27283191
PMCPMC4901518
OpenAlexW2416601295

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.