ArticleBMC health services research2021
Feasibility, acceptability, and sustainability of Project ECHO to expand capacity for pediatricians in Vietnam.
Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Implementation of Multiple Telementoring ECHO Programs From an Institutional and Organizational Perspective: Qualitative Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Improving Nurse Participation in Project ECHO: An Institutional Analysis of Primary Health Facilities in Dar es Salaam Region, Tanzania.Public health challenges · 2025Article
- Exploring Care Home Workers' Perceptions of Implementing ECHO: A Qualitative Study.International journal of older people nursing · 2025Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model is considered a platform for academic medical centers to expand their healthcare workforce capacity to medically underserved populations. It has been known as an effective solution of continuing medical education (CME) for healthcare workers that used a hub-and-spoke model to leverage knowledge from specialists to primary healthcare providers in different regions. In this study, we aim to explore the views of healthcare providers and hospital leaders regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and sustainability of Project ECHO for pediatricians.
methodsThis qualitative study was conducted at the Vietnam National Children's Hospital and its satellite hospitals from July to December 2020. We conducted 39 in-depth interviews with hospital managers and healthcare providers who participated in online Project ECHO courses. A thematic analysis approach was performed to extract the qualitative data from in-depth interviews.
resultsProject ECHO shows high feasibility when healthcare providers find motivated to improve their professional knowledge. Besides, they realized the advantages of saving time and money with online training. Although the courses had been covered fully by the Ministry of Health's fund, the participants said they could pay fees or be supported by the hospital's fund. In particular, the expectation of attaining the CME-credited certificates after completing the course also contributes to the sustainability of the program. Project ECHO's online courses should be improved if the session was better monitored with suitable time arrangements.
conclusionsProject ECHO model is highly feasible, acceptable, and sustainable as it brings great benefits to the healthcare providers, and is appropriate with the policy theme of continuing medical education of the Ministry of Health. We recommend that further studies should be conducted to assess the impact of the ECHO program, especially for patient and community outcomes.
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.