Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35041654›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2022

Integrating tuberculosis and noncommunicable diseases care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): A systematic review.

Chuan De Foo, Pami Shrestha, Leiting Wang, Qianmei Du, Alberto L García-Basteiro, Abu Saleh Abdullah, Helena Legido-Quigley

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
22.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Chuan De FooSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7254-4881
Pami ShresthaSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-0410-8812
Leiting WangGlobal Health Program, Duke Kunshan University, Kunshan, Jiangsu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8049-5132
Qianmei DuGlobal Health Program, Duke Kunshan University, Kunshan, Jiangsu, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5120-5223
Alberto L García-BasteiroISGlobal, Hospital Clínic, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2038-5505
Abu Saleh AbdullahGlobal Health Program, Duke Kunshan University, Kunshan, Jiangsu, China.
Helena Legido-QuigleySaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4113-4542
National University of Singapore · SGDuke Kunshan University · CNBoston University · USManhiça Health Research Centre · MZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are facing a combined affliction from both tuberculosis (TB) and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), which threatens population health and further strains the already stressed health systems. Integrating services for TB and NCDs is advantageous in tackling this joint burden of diseases effectively. Therefore, this systematic review explores the mechanisms for service integration for TB and NCDs and elucidates the facilitators and barriers for implementing integrated service models in LMIC settings. METHODS AND

findingsA systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Bibliography of Asian Studies, and the Global Index Medicus from database inception to November 4, 2021. For our search strategy, the terms "tuberculosis" AND "NCDs" (and their synonyms) AND ("delivery of healthcare, integrated" OR a range of other terms representing integration) were used. Articles were included if they were descriptions or evaluations of a management or organisational change strategy made within LMICs, which aim to increase integration between TB and NCD management at the service delivery level. We performed a comparative analysis of key themes from these studies and organised the themes based on integration of service delivery options for TB and NCD services. Subsequently, these themes were used to reconfigure and update an existing framework for integration of TB and HIV services by Legido-Quigley and colleagues, which categorises the levels of integration according to types of services and location where services were offered. Additionally, we developed themes on the facilitators and barriers facing integrated service delivery models and mapped them to the World Health Organization's (WHO) health systems framework, which comprises the building blocks of service delivery, human resources, medical products, sustainable financing and social protection, information, and leadership and governance. A total of 22 articles published between 2011 and 2021 were used, out of which 13 were cross-sectional studies, 3 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 1 prospective interventional study, and 4 were mixed methods studies. The studies were conducted in 15 LMICs in Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Our synthesised framework explicates the different levels of service integration of TB and NCD services. We categorised them into 3 levels with entry into the health system based on either TB or NCDs, with level 1 integration offering only testing services for either TB or NCDs, level 2 integration offering testing and referral services to linked care, and level 3 integration providing testing and treatment services at one location. Some facilitators of integrated service include improved accessibility to integrated services, motivated and engaged providers, and low to no cost for additional services for patients. A few barriers identified were poor public awareness of the diseases leading to poor uptake of services, lack of programmatic budget and resources, and additional stress on providers due to increased workload. The limitations include the dearth of data that explores the experiences of patients and providers and evaluates programme effectiveness.

conclusionsIntegration of TB and NCD services encourages the improvement of health service delivery across disease conditions and levels of care to address the combined burden of diseases in LMICs. This review not only offers recommendations for policy implementation and improvements for similar integrated programmes but also highlights the need for more high-quality TB-NCD research.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesHumansNoncommunicable DiseasesTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID35041654
PMCPMC8806070
OpenAlexW4206373656

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.