Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28685035›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2017

Initiating a participatory action research process in the Agincourt health and socio-demographic surveillance site.

Oghenebrume Wariri, Lucia D'Ambruoso, Rhian Twine, Sizzy Ngobeni, Maria van der Merwe, Barry Spies, Kathleen Kahn, Stephen Tollman, Ryan G Wagner, Peter Byass

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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. Article
  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

10 authors.

Oghenebrume WaririCentre for Global Development and Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Lucia D'AmbruosoCentre for Global Development and Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Rhian TwineMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Sizzy NgobeniMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Maria van der MerweDirectorate for Maternal, Child, Women and Youth Health and Nutrition, Mpumalanga Department of Health, South Africa.
Barry SpiesDirectorate for Maternal, Child, Women and Youth Health and Nutrition, Mpumalanga Department of Health, South Africa.
Kathleen KahnUmeå Centre for Global Health Research, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Stephen TollmanUmeå Centre for Global Health Research, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Ryan G WagnerUmeå Centre for Global Health Research, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Peter ByassCentre for Global Development and Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N005597/1Medical Research Council MR/P014844/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite progressive health policy, disease burdens in South Africa remain patterned by deeply entrenched social inequalities. Accounting for the relationships between context, health and risk can provide important information for equitable service delivery. The aims of the research were to initiate a participatory research process with communities in a low income setting and produce evidence of practical relevance.

methodsWe initiated a participatory action research (PAR) process in the Agincourt health and socio-demographic surveillance site (HDSS) in rural north-east South Africa. Three village-based discussion groups were convened and consulted about conditions to examine, one of which was under-5 mortality. A series of discussions followed in which routine HDSS data were presented and participants' subjective perspectives were elicited and systematized into collective forms of knowledge using ranking, diagramming and participatory photography. The process concluded with a priority setting exercise. Visual and narrative data were thematically analyzed to complement the participants' analysis.

resultsA range of social and structural root causes of under-5 mortality were identified: poverty, unemployment, inadequate housing, unsafe environments and shortages of clean water. Despite these constraints, single mothers were often viewed as negligent. A series of mid-level contributory factors in clinics were also identified: overcrowding, poor staffing, delays in treatment and shortages of medications. In a similar sense, pronounced blame and negativity were directed toward clinic nurses in spite of the systems constraints identified. Actions to address these issues were prioritized as: expanding clinics, improving accountability and responsiveness of health workers, improving employment, providing clean water, and expanding community engagement for health promotion.

conclusionsWe initiated a PAR process to gain local knowledge and prioritize actions. The process was acceptable to those involved, and there was willingness and commitment to continue. The study provided a basis from which to gain support to develop fuller forms of participatory research in this setting. The next steps are to build deeper involvement of participants in the process, expand to include the perspectives of those most marginalized, and engage in the health system at different levels to move toward an ongoing process of action and learning from action.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesPopulation SurveillanceCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansPoverty AreasRisk FactorsRural PopulationSocioeconomic FactorsSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID28685035
PMCPMC5475314

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.