Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30773102›Full record

SynthesisGlobal health action2019

Factors shaping the implementation of the SAFE strategy for trachoma using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: a systematic review.

Patricia Maritim, Joseph Mumba Zulu, Choolwe Jacobs, Mumbi Chola, Gershom Chongwe, Jessy Zyambo, Hikabasa Halwindi, Charles Michelo

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Global health action, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patricia Maritima Department of Health Promotion, Economics and Policy, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.ORCID 0000-0001-8920-009X
Joseph Mumba Zulua Department of Health Promotion, Economics and Policy, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.
Choolwe Jacobsb Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.
Mumbi Cholab Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.ORCID 0000-0002-6488-113X
Gershom Chongweb Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.ORCID 0000-0003-3303-308X
Jessy Zyambob Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.
Hikabasa Halwindia Department of Health Promotion, Economics and Policy, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.
Charles Michelob Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health , University of Zambia , Lusaka , Zambia.ORCID 0000-0002-1688-1813
University of Zambia · ZM

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe SAFE strategy (surgery for trichiasis, antibiotics for active infection, facial cleanliness and environmental improvement) is the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended guideline for the elimination of blindness by trachoma by the year 2020.

objectiveWhile evaluations on the implementation of the SAFE strategy have been done, systematic reviews on the factors that have shaped implementation are lacking. This review sought to identify these factors.

methodsWe searched PUBMED, Google Scholar, CINAHL and Cochrane Collaboration to identify studies that had implemented SAFE interventions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided development of the data extraction guide and data analysis.

resultsOne hundred and thirty-seven studies were identified and only 10 papers fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Characteristics of the innovation - such as adaptation of the SAFE interventions to suit the setting and observability of positive health outcomes from pilots - increased local adoption. Characteristics of outer setting - which included strong multisectoral collaboration - were found to enhance implementation through the provision of resources necessary for programme activities. When community needs and resources were unaccounted for there was poor compatibility with local settings. Characteristics of the inner setting - such as poor staffing, high labour turnovers and lack of ongoing training - affected health workers' implementation behaviour. Implementation climate within provider organisations was shaped by availability of resources. Characteristics of individuals - which included low knowledge levels - affected the acceptability of SAFE programmes; however, early adopters could be used as change agents. Finally, the use of engagement strategies tailored towards promoting community participation and stakeholder involvement during the implementation process facilitated adoption process.

conclusionWe found CFIR to be a robust framework capable of identifying different implementation determinants in low resource settings. However, there is a need for more research on the organisational, provider and implementation process related factors for trachoma as most studies focused on the outer setting.

Indexed as

Health PromotionTrachomaBlindnessDelivery of Health CareGoalsHealth PersonnelHumansProgram DevelopmentResearchWorld Health OrganizationCFIRdeterminantsimplementationSAFE strategyTrachoma

Identifiers

PMID30773102
PMCPMC6383623
OpenAlexW2917620496

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.