Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36002860›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2022

Local problem solving in the Portuguese health examination survey: a mixed method study.

Heidi Lyshol, Ana Paula Gil, Hanna Tolonen, Sónia Namorado, Irina Kislaya, Marta Barreto, Liliana Antunes, Vânia Gaio, Ana João Santos, Ana Paula Rodrigues and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Heidi LysholDepartment of Health and Inequality, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. heidi.lyshol@fhi.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3135-5827
Ana Paula GilCICS.NOVA - Interdisciplinary Center of Social Sciences, NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Hanna TolonenFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Sónia NamoradoDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7500-8811
Irina KislayaDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5772-2416
Marta BarretoDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6464-548X
Liliana AntunesDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.
Vânia GaioDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7626-4991
Ana João SantosDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.
Ana Paula RodriguesDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2264-4723
Carlos Matias DiasDepartment of Epidemiology, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0206-5874

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParticipation rates in health surveys, recognized as an important quality dimension, have been declining over the years, which may affect representativeness and confidence in results. The Portuguese national health examination survey INSEF (2015) achieved a participation rate of 43.9%, which is in line with participation rates from other similar health examination surveys. The objective of this article is to describe how local teams of survey personnel conducted the survey, describing strategies used to solve practical survey problems and to try to increase the participation rate.

methodsAfter a literature search, informal interviews were conducted with 14 public health officials from local health examination teams, regional and central authorities. Forty-one of the local staff members (survey personnel) also filled in a short questionnaire anonymously. The interviews and self-administered questionnaires were analysed using mixed methods, informed by thematic analysis.

resultsThe local teams believed that the detailed manual, described as a "cookbook for making a health examination survey", made it possible to maintain high scientific standards while allowing for improvising solutions to problems in the local context. The quality of the manual, supported by a series of training workshops with the central research and support team, gave the teams the confidence and knowledge to implement local solutions. Motivation and cohesion within the local teams were among the goals of the training process. Local teams felt empowered by being given large responsibilities and worked hard to incite people to attend the examination through a close and persuasive approach. Local teams praised their INSA contacts for being available for assistance throughout the survey, and said they were inspired to try harder to reach participants to please their contacts for interpersonal reasons.

conclusionsThe theory of organizational improvisation or bricolage, which means using limited resources to solve problems, was useful to discuss and understand what took place during INSEF. A detailed manual covering standard procedures, continuous monitoring of the data collection and face-to-face workshops, including role-play, were vital to assure high scientific standards and high participation rates in this health examination survey. Close contacts between the central team and local focal points in all regions and all survey sites were key to accommodating unexpected challenges and innovative solutions.

Indexed as

Health examination surveyOrganizational improvisationParticipation rateProcedure manual

Identifiers

PMID36002860
PMCPMC9400230

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.