Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31340833›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Supply chain management and accessibility to point-of-care testing in resource-limited settings: a systematic scoping review.

Desmond Kuupiel, Vitalis Bawontuo, Paul K Drain, Nonjabulo Gwala, Tivani P Mashamba-Thompson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Bioinspired and Cost-Effective Device for Minimally Invasive Blood Sampling.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. An abbreviated Caprini model for VTE risk assessment in trauma.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Desmond KuupielDepartment of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. desmondkuupiel98@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7780-1955
Vitalis BawontuoFaculty of Health and Allied Sciences, Catholic University College of Ghana, Fiapre, Sunyani, Ghana.
Paul K DrainInternational Clinical Research Center, Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Nonjabulo GwalaDepartment of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Tivani P Mashamba-ThompsonDepartment of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.

Funding

Clinic-based Screening to Prevent HIV-associated Cryptococcal MortalityK23AI108293 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DRAIN, PAUL K · 2014 to 2018
$928k
NIAID NIH HHS K23 AI108293
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorld Health Organization (WHO) has created an essential list of in-vitro diagnostics. Supply chain management (SCM) is said to be the vehicle that ensures that developed point-of-care (POC) tests reach their targeted settings for use. We therefore, mapped evidence on SCM of and accessibility to POC testing (availability and use of POC tests) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe conducted a systematic scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework as a guide. We searched PubMed; CINAHL; MEDLINE; WEB of Science; Science Direct; and Google Scholar databases for studies that focused on POC diagnostic tests and SCM. The review included studies that were undertaken in 140 countries defined by the World Bank as LMICs published up to August 2017. Two reviewers independently screened the abstracts and full articles against the eligibility criteria. The study used the mixed methods appraisal tool version 2011 to assess the risk of bias for the included studies. NVivo version 11 was employed to extract themes from all included studies and results presented using a narrative approach.

resultsOf 292 studies identified in this review, only 15 published between 2009 and 2017 included evidence on POC diagnostics and SCM. Of the 15 studies, three were conducted in Zambia, one each in Mozambique, Uganda, Guatemala; South Africa, one in Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and one multi-country study (Tanzania, Uganda, China, Peru and Zambia and Brazil). Six studies were not country specific since they were not primary studies. Majority of the studies reported stock-outs of HIV, syphilis, and malaria POC tests. There was a moderate to substantial level of agreement between the reviewers' responses at full article screening stage (Kappa statistic = 0.80, p < 0.01). Nine studies underwent methodological quality appraisal and all, scored between 90 and 100%.

conclusionsThe results demonstrated limited published research on SCM of and accessibility to POC testing in LMICs. Further studies aimed at investigating SCM of POC tests in resource-limited settings to identify the barriers/challenges and provide a context-specific evidence-based solutions for policy/decision makers, implementers, and POC developers, funders, and development partners would be essential. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016043711.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care TestingHealth Services AccessibilityHumansResource AllocationSystems AnalysisAvailabilityLow-and-middle-income countriesPoint of care diagnostics; supply chain management; accessibilityUse

Identifiers

PMID31340833
PMCPMC6657084

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.