Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29043191›Full record

ArticleAfrican journal of laboratory medicine2014

Using standard and institutional mentorship models to implement SLMTA in Kenya.

Ernest P Makokha, Samuel Mwalili, Frank L Basiye, Clement Zeh, Wilfred I Emonyi, Raphael Langat, Elizabeth T Luman, Jane Mwangi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African journal of laboratory medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

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

8 authors.

Ernest P MakokhaDivision of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kenya.
Samuel MwaliliDivision of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kenya.
Frank L BasiyeDivision of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kenya.
Clement ZehDivision of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kenya.
Wilfred I EmonyiAcademic Model Providing Access to Healthcare (AMPATH), Moi University School of Medicine, Kenya.
Raphael LangatHenry Jackson Foundation, Kenya.
Elizabeth T LumanInternational Laboratory Branch, Division of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United States.
Jane MwangiDivision of Global HIV/AIDS, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kenya.

Funding

PS08-842, PEPFAR LABORATORY TRAINING PROJECTU2GPS001285 · PS · AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR CLINICAL PATHOLOGY · PI CASTLE, SHANNON H · 2008 to 2014
$26.2M
NCHHSTP CDC HHS U2G PS001285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKenya is home to several high-performing internationally-accredited research laboratories, whilst most public sector laboratories have historically lacked functioning quality management systems. In 2010, Kenya enrolled an initial eight regional and four national laboratories into the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme. To address the challenge of a lack of mentors for the regional laboratories, three were paired, or 'twinned', with nearby accredited research laboratories to provide institutional mentorship, whilst the other five received standard mentorship.

objectivesThis study examines results from the eight regional laboratories in the initial SLMTA group, with a focus on mentorship models.

methodsThree SLMTA workshops were interspersed with three-month periods of improvement project implementation and mentorship. Progress was evaluated at baseline, mid-term, and exit using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) audit checklist and scores were converted into a zero- to five-star scale.

resultsAt baseline, the mean score for the eight laboratories was 32%; all laboratories were below the one-star level. At mid-term, all laboratories had measured improvements. However, the three twinned laboratories had increased an average of 32 percentage points and reached one to three stars; whilst the five non-twinned laboratories increased an average of 10 percentage points and remained at zero stars. At exit, twinned laboratories had increased an average 12 additional percentage points (44 total), reaching two to four stars; non-twinned laboratories increased an average of 28 additional percentage points (38 total), reaching one to three stars.

conclusionThe partnership used by the twinning model holds promise for future collaborations between ministries of health and state-of-the-art research laboratories in their regions for laboratory quality improvement. Where they exist, such laboratories may be valuable resources to be used judiciously so as to accelerate sustainable quality improvement initiated through SLMTA.

Identifiers

PMID29043191
PMCPMC5637804

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.