ArticleBMJ open2023
Availability of refractive error correction services in selected Zambian hospitals: a cross-sectional quantitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of human resource for eye health services in Southern Ethiopia.Human resources for health · 2025Article
- Assessment of pediatric eye care services in health facilities in the Ashanti region of Ghana.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Article
- Optometrists' perceptions of vision impairment services in public hospitals of Limpopo province.African journal of disability · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the availability of refractive error correction services (RECS) in selected Zambian hospitals.
methodsBetween October 2021 and March 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional study design among 20 eye health service providers selected from 20 public health facilities offering RECS in 20 districts from 8 provinces of Zambia. A stratified random sampling technique was used to select study participants. A questionnaire was developed based on the access to healthcare services framework and distributed via email to respondents to collect their perspectives on the availability of RECS.
resultsAll 20 respondents returned the completed questionnaires. Most facilities met the Ministry of Health recommended equipment requirement, though tonometers were lacking in some facilities. Out of the 20 facilities, 75% reported having optometry technologists as the main staff offering eye health services; 10% had an ophthalmologist; no facility had an optometrist; none conducted school-based programmes and only 1 facility (5%) was able to dispense spectacles soon after refraction because it had a spectacle manufacturing workshop.
conclusionThese findings show limited availability of RECS in the 20 health facilities. They also confirm that challenges in staffing levels, insufficient equipment and low rate of spectacle dispensing negatively affect availability of these services. Furthermore, insufficient infrastructure undermines service delivery. Addressing these challenges is cardinal to improving RECS delivery and enhancing universal eye healthcare coverage in Zambia.
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.