ArticleSystematic reviews2019
Experiential learning for primary healthcare workers in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Empowering visually impaired students through innovative tools and accessible waste sorting education at the national level.PloS one · 2025Article
- Factors affecting emergency medical dispatchers decision making in stroke calls - a qualitative study.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- A framework for improved collaboration on HTA in the Asia-Pacific region: a role for HTAsiaLink.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Review
- An ethnographic study evaluating emergency obstetric care education and training in a remote, fragile region of Southeast Asia: Study protocol.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Findings of living donation experiences shared on a digital storytelling platform: A thematic analysis.PEC innovation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImproving the quality of primary healthcare services is one of the global health priorities. Literature shows that the incompetency of healthcare providers has the potential to negatively affect the quality of the services provided. Experiential learning is one of the educational models that can be used to help improve healthcare service delivery. The main objective of this study is to systematically map literature on the evidence of experiential learning for primary healthcare workers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
methodsThis systematic scoping review's search strategy will involve the following electronic databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, EBSOhost (Academic search complete, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Addition, MEDLINE) and open access for unpublished theses and dissertations. Websites such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the departments of health website will be searched for policies and guidelines on experiential learning training programs. Following title searching, two-independent reviewers will conduct screening of abstracts and full articles. The screenings will be guided by the eligibility criteria. Data will be extracted from the included studies and the emerging themes will be analysed. The review team will analyse the implications of the findings in relation to the research question and aim of the study. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) will be employed for quality appraisal of included studies. DISCUSSION: We anticipate finding a significant number of studies on the applications of experiential learning in resource-limited settings. Findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, peer presentations as well as presentations at relevant conferences.
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.