ArticlePloS one2020
Evaluating the implementation of the Reproductive Life Plan in disadvantaged communities: A mixed-methods study using the i-PARIHS framework.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Readiness for Change: A Baseline Situational Analysis of Breastfeeding Support Within Acute and Community Healthcare Settings in the Republic of Ireland.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
- Combined use of the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework with other implementation frameworks: a systematic review.Implementation science communications · 2025Review
- Preconception care practices among primary health care nurses working in public health facilities in KwaZulu-Natal.Global health action · 2022Article
- Conceptual and relational advances of the PARIHS and i-PARIHS frameworks over the last decade: a critical interpretive synthesis.Implementation science : IS · 2022Review
- 'If we don't assess the patient's vision, we risk starting at the wrong end': a qualitative evaluation of a stroke service knowledge translation project.BMC health services research · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Reproductive Life Plan (RLP) is a clinical tool to help clients find strategies to achieve their reproductive goals. Despite much research on the RLP from high-income countries, it has never been studied in low- or middle income countries. Together with health workers called Mentor Mothers (MMs), we used a context-adapted RLP in disadvantaged areas in Eswatini. Our aim was to evaluate the implementation of the RLP in this setting. METHODOLOGY: MMs participated in focus group discussions (FGDs, n = 3 MMs n = 29) in January 2018 and at follow-up in May 2018 (n = 4, MMs n = 24). FGDs covered challenges in using the RLP, how to adapt it, and later experiences from using it. We used a deductive qualitative thematic analysis with the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework, creating themes guided by its four constructs: facilitation, innovation, recipients and context. The MMs also answered a questionnaire to assess the implementation process inspired by normalization process theory.
resultsThe RLP intervention was feasible and acceptable among MMs and fit well with existing practices. The RLP questions were perceived as advantageous since they opened up discussions with clients and enabled reflection. All except one MM (n = 23) agreed or strongly agreed that they valued the effect the RLP has had on their work. Using the RLP, the MMs observed progress in pregnancy planning among their clients and thought it improved the quality of contraceptive counselling. The clients' ability to form and achieve their reproductive goals was hampered by contextual factors such as intimate partner violence and women's limited reproductive health and rights. DISCUSSION: The RLP was easily implemented in these disadvantaged communities and the MMs were key persons in this intervention. The RLP should be further evaluated among clients and suitable approaches to include partners are required.
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.