Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36803143›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2023

Implementation considerations for non-communicable disease-related integration in primary health care: a rapid review of qualitative evidence.

N Leon, H Xu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Outcomes and lessons from the integrated NCD-humanitarian response in Jordan (2020-2025).Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

N LeonIndependent Public Health Researcher, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
H XuDepartment of Noncommunicable Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. xuh@who.int.

Funding

European Commission funded EU-ACP UHC programme in WHO WHO registration 2020/1033149-0World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntegrated delivery of primary health care (PHC) services is a health reform recommended for achieving ambitious targets of the Sustainable Development Goals and Universal Health Coverage, responding to growing challenges of managing non-communicable and multimorbidity. However, more evidence is needed on effective implementation of PHC integration in different country settings.

objectiveThis rapid review synthesized qualitative evidence on implementation factors affecting integration of non-communicable disease (NCD) into PHC, from the perspective of implementers. The review contributes evidence to inform the World Health Organizations' guidance on integration of NCD control and prevention to strengthen health systems.

methodThe review was guided by standard methods for conducting rapid systematic reviews. Data analysis was guided by the SURE and WHO health system building blocks frameworks. We used Confidence in the Evidence of Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) to assess the confidence of the main findings.

resultsThe review identified 81 records eligible for inclusion, from 595 records screened. We sampled 20 studies for analysis (including 3 from expert recommendations). Studies covered a wide range of countries (27 countries from 6 continents), the majority from low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), with a diverse set of NCD-related PHC integration combinations and implementation strategies. The main findings were categorised into three overarching themes and several sub-themes. These are, A: Policy alignment and governance, B: Health systems readiness, intervention compatibility and leadership, and C: Human resource management, development, and support. The three overarching findings were assessed as each having a moderate level of confidence.

conclusionThe review findings present insights on how health workers responses may be shaped by the complex interaction of individual, social, and organizational factors that may be specific to the context of the intervention, the importance of cross-cutting influences such as policy alignment, supportive leadership and health systems constraints, knowledge that can inform the development of future implementation strategies and implementation research.

Indexed as

Noncommunicable DiseasesHealth Care ReformHealth PersonnelHumansLeadershipPrimary Health CareIntegrated service deliveryNoncommunicable diseasesPHC integrationPrimary health care (PHC)Rapid review

Identifiers

PMID36803143
PMCPMC9938355

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.