ArticleBMC public health2019
Process evaluation in the field: global learnings from seven implementation research hypertension projects in low-and middle-income countries.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluating implementation strategies for essential newborn care interventions in low- and low middle-income countries: a systematic review.Health policy and planning · 2020Pooled it
- Process evaluation of a pragmatic implementation trial to support self-management for the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes in Uganda, South Africa and Sweden in the SMART2D project.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2022Trial
- The Implementation of a Primary Care-Based Integrated Mobile Health Intervention for Stroke Management in Rural China: Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation.Frontiers in public health · 2021Trial
- Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of implementation outcomes in an integrated mental healthcare trial in South Africa.Global health action · 2021Trial
- Conducting process evaluations of WASH interventions: a scoping review of design approaches and indicators in low- and middle-income countries.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Evaluation of physical activity intervention studies among children and adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa using the RE-AIM framework: a scoping review.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the National Dental PBRN central IRB since its inception in 2014 until 2025.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Do process evaluations open up the 'black box' of implementation interventions in health care? A scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Decentralization of hepatitis B care in sub-Saharan Africa: study protocol for a prospective cohort assessing three models of care in rural Ethiopia.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Article
- Developing an implementation fidelity measure for a family healthy weight program.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Article
- Article
- Setting the context for a complex dental intervention of role substitution in care homes: Initial process evaluation findings.Gerodontology · 2024Article
- Tele-collaborative outreach to rural patients with chronic pain: pragmatic effectiveness trial protocol for the CORPs study.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Optimizing short-term in-class process evaluation: analyzing the effectiveness of teaching interventions in pharmaceutical education using repeated measures analysis.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Challenges and enablers for scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases: a qualitative study applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to 19 research projects worldwide.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Group-based Education and monitoring program delivered by community health workers to improve control of high blood pressure in island districts of lake victoria, Uganda.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Article
- Implementing neurodevelopmental follow-up care for children with congenital heart disease: A scoping review with evidence mapping.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProcess evaluation is increasingly recognized as an important component of effective implementation research and yet, there has been surprisingly little work to understand what constitutes best practice. Researchers use different methodologies describing causal pathways and understanding barriers and facilitators to implementation of interventions in diverse contexts and settings. We report on challenges and lessons learned from undertaking process evaluation of seven hypertension intervention trials funded through the Global Alliance of Chronic Diseases (GACD).
methodsPreliminary data collected from the GACD hypertension teams in 2015 were used to inform a template for data collection. Case study themes included: (1) description of the intervention, (2) objectives of the process evaluation, (3) methods including theoretical basis, (4) main findings of the study and the process evaluation, (5) implications for the project, policy and research practice and (6) lessons for future process evaluations. The information was summarized and reported descriptively and narratively and key lessons were identified.
resultsThe case studies were from low- and middle-income countries and Indigenous communities in Canada. They were implementation research projects with intervention arm. Six theoretical approaches were used but most comprised of mixed-methods approaches. Each of the process evaluations generated findings on whether interventions were implemented with fidelity, the extent of capacity building, contextual factors and the extent to which relationships between researchers and community impacted on intervention implementation. The most important learning was that although process evaluation is time consuming, it enhances understanding of factors affecting implementation of complex interventions. The research highlighted the need to initiate process evaluations early on in the project, to help guide design of the intervention; and the importance of effective communication between researchers responsible for trial implementation, process evaluation and outcome evaluation.
conclusionThis research demonstrates the important role of process evaluation in understanding implementation process of complex interventions. This can help to highlight a broad range of system requirements such as new policies and capacity building to support implementation. Process evaluation is crucial in understanding contextual factors that may impact intervention implementation which is important in considering whether or not the intervention can be translated to other contexts.
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.