Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35551082›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Facilitators and barriers of infectious diseases surveillance activities: lessons from the Global Polio Eradication Initiative - a mixed-methods study.

Ikponmwosa Osaghae, Priyanka Agrawal, Adetoun Olateju, Olakunle Alonge

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ikponmwosa OsaghaeDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7202-7435
Priyanka AgrawalDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1314-7143
Adetoun OlatejuDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Olakunle AlongeDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA oalonge1@jhu.edu.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo document lessons from the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) by determining factors associated with successful surveillance programme globally as well as at national and subnational levels. The process of conducting surveillance has been previously recognised in the literature as important for the success of polio surveillance activities.

designA cross-sectional survey with closed and open-ended questions. SETTINGS: Survey of persons involved in the implementation of surveillance activities under the GPEI at the global level and in seven low-income and middle-income countries.

participantsIndividuals (n=802) with ≥12 months of experience implementing surveillance objective of the GPEI between 1988 and 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND

methodsQuantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with implementation process as a factor for successful surveillance programme. Horizontal analysis was used to analyse qualitative free-text responses on facilitators and barriers identified for conducting surveillance activities successfully.

resultsOverall, participants who reported challenges relating to GPEI programme characteristics had 50% lower odds of reporting implementation process as a factor for successful surveillance (adjusted OR (AOR): 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.85). Challenges were mainly perceptions of external intervention source (ie, surveillance perceived as 'foreign' to local communities) and the complexity of surveillance processes (ie, surveillance required several intricate steps). Those who reported organisational challenges were almost two times more likely to report implementation process as a factor for successful surveillance (AOR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.07 to 3.31) overall, and over threefolds (AOR: 3.32, 95% CI: 1.14 to 9.66) at the national level.

conclusionsProgramme characteristics may have impeded the process of conducting surveillance under the GPEI, while organisational characteristics may have facilitated the process. Future surveillance programmes should be designed with inputs from local communities and frontline implementers.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesPoliomyelitisCross-Sectional StudiesDisease EradicationGlobal HealthHumansImmunization Programsinfectious diseasespreventive medicinepublic health

Identifiers

PMID35551082
PMCPMC9109099
OpenAlexW4280540744

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.