Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35346045›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022

MedMinas project: design and use of mixed methods in the evaluation of pharmaceutical services in primary health care in Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Tatiana Chama Borges Luz, Noemia Urruth Leão Tavares, Ana Karine Sarvel de Castro, Isabela Cristina Marques, Elizabeth Moreira Dos Santos, Betania Barros Cota

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Tatiana Chama Borges LuzGETESA (Grupo de Estudos Transdisciplinares em Tecnologias em Saúde e Ambiente), Rene Rachou Institute (IRR), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), 1715 Augusto de Lima Ave, Barro Preto, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 30190-009, Brazil. tatiana.luz@fiocruz.br.
Noemia Urruth Leão TavaresDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Brasília, Darcy Ribeiro University Campus, Asa Norte, Brasília, Distrito Federal, 70910-90, Brazil.
Ana Karine Sarvel de CastroGETESA (Grupo de Estudos Transdisciplinares em Tecnologias em Saúde e Ambiente), Rene Rachou Institute (IRR), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), 1715 Augusto de Lima Ave, Barro Preto, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 30190-009, Brazil.
Isabela Cristina MarquesGETESA (Grupo de Estudos Transdisciplinares em Tecnologias em Saúde e Ambiente), Rene Rachou Institute (IRR), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), 1715 Augusto de Lima Ave, Barro Preto, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 30190-009, Brazil.
Elizabeth Moreira Dos SantosLASER (Laboratório de Avaliação de Situações Endêmicas Regionais), National School of Public Health Sérgio Arouca (ENSP), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), 1480 Leopoldo Bulhões St, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, 21041-210, Brazil.
Betania Barros CotaGETESA (Grupo de Estudos Transdisciplinares em Tecnologias em Saúde e Ambiente), Rene Rachou Institute (IRR), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), 1715 Augusto de Lima Ave, Barro Preto, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 30190-009, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe main purposes of primary care-based pharmaceutical services (PHCPS) in Brazil are to provide free access to medicines and pharmaceutical care to patients. Several obstacles hinder achieving their goals; thus, MedMinas Project aimed to evaluate the PHCPS, the supply system, and the use of medicines. This paper reflects on our experience designing, planning, and conducting the project, describing the issues yielded in the field and lessons learned.

methodsThis work consists of a mixed-methods study conducted in Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil. We adopted the principles of Rapid Evaluation Methods, employing a multistage stratified sampling for the quantitative and a purposeful sampling for the qualitative components, respectively, and a documentary research. Data sources included individuals (patients and professionals), prescriptions, dispensed medicines, and policy documents collected between April and October 2019. The quantitative data described in this paper were analysed by descriptive statistics and the qualitative by Thematic Content Analysis.

resultsA total of 26 municipalities varying from 37,784 to 409,341 inhabitants were included. The field team spent, on average, 16 days in each location. We interviewed 1019 respondents, of which 127 were professionals and 892 patients. The participation rate varied from 92 to 100%, depending on the respondent subgroup. Most interviews lasted between 45 min and one hour. Fieldwork challenges included participants' enrolment, field team, interview processes, and project budget. The participants provided positive feedback and five main themes emerged from the interview experience (self-awareness, sense of gratitude, research value, access to findings, and benefits of the research). Additionally, we collected copies of 1072 documents and 2070 pieces of data from prescriptions filled and medicines dispensed at the PCP.

conclusionWe demonstrated the viability of conducting the MedMinas Project in an extensive geographic area within effective time frames that provided meaningful, high-quality data from multiple actors. The methods and lessons learned are valuable for researchers across various disciplines in similar urban settings in Brazil and other countries of low- and middle-income (LMIC).

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical ServicesBrazilHumansPrimary Health CareData CollectionDocumentary AnalysisHealth ProfessionalsHealth Services ResearchManagersMixed-Methods StudyPatientsPharmaceutical servicesPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID35346045
PMCPMC8962222

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.