ArticleSystematic reviews2019
Mapping evidence of the concomitant management of schistosomiasis by traditional health practitioners and health care professionals in communities with high prevalent infections: a systematic 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundSchistosomiasis is one of the most prevalent parasitic diseases in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), being regarded as a neglected tropical disease in sub-Saharan Africa. Praziquantel is the conventional treatment recommended for schistosomiasis in mainstream healthcare systems. In many poor settings, while many people reportedly use both traditional medicine and public sector mainstream healthcare systems, little is known if those infected with schistosomiasis use both African traditional and prescribed antischistosomal medicines. This review aims to map evidence of the concomitant management of schistosomiasis by traditional health practitioners (THPs) and health care professionals (HCPs) in communities with a high prevalence schistosomiasis infection in LMICs. METHODS/
designGuided by Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we will map the evidence from relevant studies dating from 2007 to 2019 published in LMICs. An electronic keyword search of the following databases will be conducted: PubMed, Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and MEDLINE via EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, and WILEY online Library. Peer-reviewed articles, gray literature sources, and reference lists will be included to identify eligible studies. Following title screening, two reviewers will independently screen the abstracts and full texts. Any study that focuses on managing schistosomiasis will be included. The data will be analyzed using thematic analysis with the help of NVIVO software version 12, with the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) being used to assess the quality of the included studies. DISCUSSION: This review will map the evidence in the literature of the concomitant management of schistosomiasis by THPs and HCPs in communities with a high prevalent infection in LMICs. The review findings will be important for policy makers across the healthcare continuum and be used to inform stakeholders' consensus process to explore the development of a generic set of patient-centered quality indicators that are applicable to multiple care settings. It will also identify research gaps in schistosomiasis management in LMICs and provide direction for future research. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presented in relevant conferences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017078198.
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.