Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28588980›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2016

Addressing the challenges of diagnostics demand and supply: insights from an online global health discussion platform.

Nora Engel, Keri Wachter, Madhukar Pai, Jim Gallarda, Catharina Boehme, Isabelle Celentano, Rebecca Weintraub

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Nora EngelDepartment of Health, Ethics & Society/CAPHRI, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Keri WachterHarvard Medical School, Global Health Delivery Project at Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Madhukar PaiMcGill Global Health Programs & McGill International TB Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Jim GallardaBill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Catharina BoehmeFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Isabelle CelentanoBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Rebecca WeintraubHarvard Medical School, Global Health Delivery Project at Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USBill & Melinda Gates Foundation · USFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics · CHHarvard University · USMaastricht University · NLMcGill University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several barriers challenge development, adoption and scale-up of diagnostics in low and middle income countries. An innovative global health discussion platform allows capturing insights from the global health community on factors driving demand and supply for diagnostics. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of the online discussion 'Advancing Care Delivery: Driving Demand and Supply of Diagnostics' organised by the Global Health Delivery Project (GHD) (http://www.ghdonline.org/) at Harvard University. The discussion, driven by 12 expert panellists, explored what must be done to develop delivery systems, business models, new technologies, interoperability standards, and governance mechanisms to ensure that patients receive the right diagnostic at the right time. The GHD Online (GHDonline) platform reaches over 19 000 members from 185 countries. Participants (N=99) in the diagnostics discussion included academics, non-governmental organisations, manufacturers, policymakers, and physicians. Data was coded and overarching categories analysed using qualitative data analysis software. Participants considered technical characteristics of diagnostics as smaller barriers to effective use of diagnostics compared with operational and health system challenges, such as logistics, poor fit with user needs, cost, workforce, infrastructure, access, weak regulation and political commitment. Suggested solutions included: health system strengthening with patient-centred delivery; strengthened innovation processes; improved knowledge base; harmonised guidelines and evaluation; supply chain innovations; and mechanisms for ensuring quality and capacity. Engaging and connecting different actors involved with diagnostic development and use is paramount for improving diagnostics. While the discussion participants were not representative of all actors involved, the platform enabled a discussion between globally acknowledged experts and physicians working in different countries.

Indexed as

Diagnostics and tools

Identifiers

PMID28588980
PMCPMC5321377
OpenAlexW2558254411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.