ArticleBMC health services research2018
Process evaluation of a National Primary Eye Care Programme in Rwanda.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dissemination and implementation science for global ophthalmology: closing the last-mile translational gap.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Using operational research as a tool to improve eye health services and systems in low-and middle-income settings: lessons from India and Nepal.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Lived experience and lessons learned from the support of two secondary eye care units to improve cataract surgery and refractive services in two regions of Ethiopia: health system-strengthening support.International health · 2025Article
- Child eye health in Ethiopia: a mixed methods analysis of policy and commitment to action.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Article
- Associations of self-reported vision impairment with depression symptoms among middle-aged and older Chinese.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2022Article
- Human resource and governance challenges in the delivery of primary eye care: a mixed methods feasibility study in Nigeria.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Validation of 4D Components for Measuring Quality of the Public Health Data Collection Process: Elicitation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- The Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health: vision beyond 2020.The Lancet. Global health · 2021Review
- Implementing an integrated primary eye care programme in Rwanda.Community eye health · 2021Article
- Peer-support to increase uptake of screening for diabetic retinopathy: process evaluation of the DURE cluster randomized trial.Tropical medicine and health · 2020Article
- Growing demand for nursing in eye care in Sri Lanka.Community eye health · 2020Article
- Process and Outcome Evaluation of Integrating Primary Eye Care into Primary Healthcare: A Quasi-Experimental Study in Rural China.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisual impairment is a global public health problem, with an estimated 285 million affected globally, of which 43% are due to refractive error. A lack of specialist eye care in low and middle-income countries indicates a new model of care would support a task-shifting model and address this urgent need. We describe the features and results of the process evaluation of a national primary eye care (PEC) programme in Rwanda.
methodsWe used the Medical Research Council process evaluation framework to examine the implementation of the PEC programme, and to determine enablers and challenges to implementation. The process evaluation uses a mixed methods approach, drawing on results from several sources including a survey of 574 attendees at 50 PEC clinics, structured clinical observations of 30 PEC nurses, in-depth interviews with 19 key stakeholders, documentary review and a participatory process evaluation workshop with key stakeholders to review collated evidence and contextualize the results.
resultsStructured clinical assessment indicated that the PEC provided is consistent with the PEC curriculum, with over 90% of the clinical examination processes conducted correctly. In 4 years, programme monitoring data showed that nearly a million PEC eye examinations had been conducted in every health centre in Rwanda, with 2707 nurses trained. The development of the eye health system was an important enabler in the implementation of PEC, where political support allowed key developments such as inclusion of eye-drops on the essential medicines list, the inclusion of PEC on insurance benefits, the integration of PEC indicators on the health management information systems and integration of the PEC curriculum into the general nursing school curriculum. Challenges included high turnover of primary care nurses, lack of clarity and communication on the future funding of the programme, competing priorities for the health sector and sustained supervision to assure quality of care.
conclusionsA model of a national primary eye care programme is presented, with service delivery to all areas in Rwanda. Key learning from this evaluation is the importance of strengthening the eye health care system, together with a strong focus on training primary care nurses using a PEC curriculum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.