Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27390550›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2016

Mixed methods evaluation of a primary eye care training programme for primary health workers in Morogoro Tanzania.

Milka Madaha Mafwiri, Emma Jolley, Joanna Hunter, Clare Elizabeth Gilbert, Elena Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Assessment of pediatric eye care services in health facilities in the Ashanti region of Ghana.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Primary Eye Care in Eastern Nepal.Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Milka Madaha MafwiriDepartment of Ophthalmology, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, P.O. Box 65405, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania.
Emma JolleySightsavers, London, UK.
Joanna HunterUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Clare Elizabeth GilbertInternational Centre for Eye Health, Department of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elena SchmidtSightsavers, London, UK.
Sightsavers · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMuhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences · TZUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are 285 million people with visual impairment (VI) worldwide including 39 million who are blind; 15 % of those with VI live in Africa, and around 80 % of VI is preventable or treatable with the right equipment, information and skills. The scarcity of human resources for eye health, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, is a key challenge towards achieving this goal. Therefore training primary health workers (PHW) in providing eye-care services has been seen by some authors as a way to improve access to eye-care services in remote communities. However, the package of interventions which could be effectively delivered for eye-care at the primary-care level or the set of skills and competencies that PHWs need has not yet been delineated. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a four day training programme of PHWs in primary eye-care conducted in Morogoro, Tanzania in 2010/2011.

methodsA mixed methods study using pre- and immediate post-training knowledge assessment of 60 trainees, and in-depth face to face interviews with 20 PHWs and 8 service managers 2 to 3 years after the training.

resultsPre-and immediate post-training assessments indicated improvement in health worker knowledge about eye-care in the short term. Qualitative investigations 2 to 3 years after the training showed that although staff could make the correct management decisions when presented with eye-health problems, they often could not make a correct diagnosis. PHWs and managers reported satisfaction with the content of the training but some of the less well qualified staff found it overwhelming. Theoretical teaching was appreciated by most participants but almost all suggested increasing the time spent on acquiring skills. The training manual was accepted by many and some improvements were recommended. All interviewed PHWs were keen to improve their skills and knowledge. Acquired skills and knowledge were used for identification, referral of patients and for eye-health promotion.

conclusionThe training program in Morogoro was considered by PHWs as broadly successful and satisfying in terms of content, methods and duration of training. However, any future programme needs to be considered within the context of strengthening wider health systems.

Indexed as

Primary eye carePrimary health workersTraining

Identifiers

PMID27390550
PMCPMC4936119
OpenAlexW2467292721

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.