Trial reportPloS one2023
Post-intervention acceptability of multicomponent intervention for management of hypertension in rural Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka- a qualitative study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Acceptability of fixed-dose combination treatments for hypertension in Kenya: A qualitative study using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Implementing community-based interventions for the management of chronic conditions in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review of qualitative evidence.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Universal health coverage in Pakistan: exploring the landscape of the health system, health seeking behaviours, and utilization of health services.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024Review
- The effect of educational intervention based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on self-care behaviors and quality of life of hypertensive patients.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Managing diabetes and hypertension in western Kenya: A qualitative study of experiences of patients supported by the primary health integrated care for chronic conditions (PIC4C) model of care.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCOBRA-BPS (Control of Blood Pressure and Risk Attenuation-Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka), a multicomponent, community health-worker (CHW)-led hypertension management program, has been shown to be effective in rural communities in South Asia. This paper presents the acceptability of COBRA-BPS multicomponent intervention among the key stakeholders.
methodsWe conducted post-implementation interviews of 87 stakeholder including 23 community health workers (CHWs), 19 physicians and 45 patients in 15 rural communities randomized to COBRA-BPS multicomponent intervention in in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. We used Theoretical Framework for Acceptability framework (TFA) with a focus on affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity cost, perceived effectiveness and self-efficacy.
resultsCOBRA-BPS multicomponent intervention was acceptable to most stakeholders. Despite some concerns about workload, most CHWs were enthusiastic and felt empowered. Physicians appreciated the training sessions and felt trusted by their patients. Patients were grateful to receive the intervention and valued it. However, patients in Pakistan and Bangladesh expressed the need for supplies of free medicines from the primary health facilities, while those in Sri Lanka were concerned about supplies' irregularities. All stakeholders favoured scaling-up COBRA-BPS at a national level.
conclusionsCOBRA-BPS multicomponent intervention is acceptable to the key stakeholders in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Community engagement for national scale-up of COBRA-BPS is likely to be successful in all three countries.
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.