Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33446099›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2021

Steps towards implementing evidence-based screening in family medicine in Ukraine: SWOT-analysis of an approach of multidimensional empowerment.

Pavlo Kolesnyk, Thomas Frese, Shlomo Vinker, Ivanna Shushman, Albina Zharkova, Nassir Messaadi, Andriy Kolesnyk, Sabine Bayen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Pavlo KolesnykDepartment of Family Medicine and Outpatient Care, Medical Faculty #2, Education Scientific Family Medicine Training Centre, Uzhgorod National University, Uzhgorod, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0001-7625-7142
Thomas FreseDepartment of General Practice & Family Medicine, Medical Faculty, Martin-Luther University, Magdeburger Straße 8, 06112, Halle /Saale, Germany. Thomas.frese@uk-halle.de.ORCID 0000-0001-9745-5690
Shlomo VinkerDepartment of Family Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-9804-7103
Ivanna ShushmanDepartment of Family Medicine and Outpatient Care, Medical Faculty #2, Education Scientific Family Medicine Training Centre, Uzhgorod National University, Uzhgorod, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0002-6060-0804
Albina ZharkovaDepartment of Family Medicine, Sumy State University, Sumy, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0002-1679-359X
Nassir MessaadiDepartment of General Practice, University of Lille, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3602-7120
Andriy KolesnykDepartment of Family Medicine and Outpatient Care, Medical Faculty #2, Education Scientific Family Medicine Training Centre, Uzhgorod National University, Uzhgorod, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0003-3453-031X
Sabine BayenDepartment of General Practice, University of Lille, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3334-9394

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study is to forward the implementation of an operational evidence-based state screening program of common diseases in Ukraine, where currently no state-based and evidence-based screening (EBS) exists. EBS should be performed by Family Doctors in a primary care setting and concern prevalent diseases in adults, such as: obesity (BMI), hypertension (BP measurement), diabetes (glycaemia), dyslipidemia (cholesterol/lipids), colon cancer (FOBT/colonoscopy), breast cancer (mammography), STIs (chlamydia, syphilis), HIV, HBV, HCV (i.e. serology or other rapid tests), HPV (swabs), cervical cancer (test Pap). depression (i.e., PHQ-9), and smoking (i.e., Fagerstrom).

methodsFour needs-based research actions were led among citizens and healthcare professionals, based on multidimensional empowerment. Internal Strengths and Weaknesses of the ongoing implementation process were identified through these studies, whereas external Opportunities and Threats were determined by the present socio-cultural and political context. This SWOT analysis is likely to guide future state-based initiatives to accomplish EBS implementation in Ukraine.

resultsInternal Strengths are the bottom-up multidimensional empowerment approach, teaching of EBS and the development of an internet-based platform "Screening adviser" to assist shared decision making for person-centred EBS programs. Internal Weaknesses identified for the Family Doctors are a heterogeneous screening and the risk of decreasing motivation to screen. External Opportunities include the ongoing PHC reform, the existent WONCA and WHO support, and the existence of EBS programs in Europe. External Threats are the lack of national guidelines, not fully introduced gate keeping system, the vulnerable socio-economic situation, the war situation in the East of Ukraine and the Covid-19 pandemic.

conclusionsWe started EBS implementation through research actions, based on a multidimensional empowerment of citizens, HCP and in EBS pathways involved stakeholder teams, to foster a sustainable operational human resource to get involved in that new EBS pathway to implement. The presented SWOT-analysis of this ongoing implementation process allows to plan and optimize future steps towards a state based and supports EBS program in Ukraine.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineFamily PracticeState MedicineArmed ConflictsCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningUkraineEmpowermentEvidence-based screeningFamily practiceImplementation studyResearch actionUkraine

Identifiers

PMID33446099
PMCPMC7808735

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.