Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28762894›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2017

How patients navigate the diagnostic ecosystem in a fragmented health system: a qualitative study from India.

Vijayashree Yellapa, Narayanan Devadasan, Anja Krumeich, Nitika Pant Pai, Caroline Vadnais, Madhukar Pai, Nora Engel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

7 authors.

Vijayashree Yellapaa Institute of Public Health , Bangalore , India.ORCID 0000-0003-4479-4781
Narayanan Devadasana Institute of Public Health , Bangalore , India.
Anja Krumeichb Department of Health, Ethics & Society, Research School for Public Health and Primary Care , Maastricht University , Maastricht , The Netherlands.
Nitika Pant Paic Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine , McGill University and McGill University Health Centre , Montreal , Canada.
Caroline Vadnaisd McGill International TB Centre, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics , McGill University , Montreal , Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0446-4879
Madhukar Paid McGill International TB Centre, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics , McGill University , Montreal , Canada.
Nora Engelb Department of Health, Ethics & Society, Research School for Public Health and Primary Care , Maastricht University , Maastricht , The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepending on a country's diagnostic infrastructure, patients and providers play different roles in ensuring that correct and timely diagnosis is made. However, little is known about the work done by patients in accessing diagnostic services and completing the 'test and treat' loop.

objectiveTo address this knowledge gap, we traced the diagnostic journeys of patients with tuberculosis, diabetes, hypertension and typhoid, and examined the work they had to do to arrive at a diagnosis.

methodsThis paper draws on a qualitative study, which included 78 semi-structured interviews and 13 focus group discussions with patients, public and private healthcare providers, community health workers, test manufacturers, laboratory technicians, program managers and policymakers. Data were collected between January and June 2013 in rural and urban Karnataka, South India, as part of a larger project on barriers to point-of-care testing. We reconstructed patient diagnostic processes retrospectively and analyzed emerging themes and patterns.

resultsThe journey to access diagnostic services requires a high level of involvement and immense work from patients and/or their caretakers. This process entails overcoming cost and distance, negotiating social relations, continuously making sense of their illness and diagnosis, producing and transporting samples, dealing with the social consequences of diagnosis, and returning results to the treating provider. The quality and content of interactions with providers were crucial for completion of test and treat loops. If the tasks became overwhelming, patients opted out, delayed being tested, switched providers and/or reverted to self-testing or self-treatment practices.

conclusionOur study demonstrated how difficult it can be for patients to complete diagnostic journeys and how the health system works as far as diagnostics are concerned. If new point-of-care tests are to be implemented successfully, policymakers, program officers and test developers need to find ways to ease patient navigation through diagnostic services.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePatient NavigationPoint-of-Care TestingAdultAgedCommunity Health WorkersDiabetes MellitusFemaleFocus GroupsGovernment ProgramsHumansIndiaInterviews as TopicMaleMedical AssistanceMiddle Ageddiagnosisdiagnostic journeyshealth systemIndialaboratory testspatient-centered carePoint-of-carequalitative

Identifiers

PMID28762894
PMCPMC5645647

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.