Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36910403›Full record

ArticleAfrican health sciences2022

Closing the gaps in defining and conceptualising acceptability of healthcare: a qualitative thematic content analysis.

Joy Blaise Bucyibaruta, Doriccah Peu, Lesley Bamford, Annatjie van der Wath

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African health sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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.

Joy Blaise BucyibarutaSchool of Health Systems and Public Health, University of Pretoria.
Doriccah PeuDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Pretoria.
Lesley BamfordSchool of Health Systems and Public Health, University of Pretoria.
Annatjie van der WathDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Pretoria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the importance of healthcare acceptability, the public health community has yet to agree on its explicit definition and conceptual framework. We explored different definitions and conceptual frameworks of healthcare acceptability, and identified commonalities in order to develop an integrated definition and conceptual framework of healthcare acceptability. Materials and Methods: We applied qualitative thematic content analysis on research articles that attempted to define healthcare acceptability. We searched online databases and purposefully selected relevant articles that we imported into ATLAS.ti 8.4 for deductive and inductive analysis which continued until there were no new information emerging from selected documents (data saturation). Results: Our analysis of the literature affirmed that healthcare acceptability remains poorly defined; limiting its application in public health. We proposed a practical definition attempting to fill identified gaps. We defined acceptability as a "multi-construct concept describing the nonlinear cumulative combination in parts or in whole of the fit between the expected and experienced healthcare from the patient, provider or healthcare systems and policy perspectives in a given context." Practice Implications: We presented and described a workable definition and framework of healthcare acceptability that can be applied to different actors including patients, healthcare providers, researchers, managers or policy makers.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePatient Acceptance of Health CareHealth FacilitiesHealth PersonnelHumanscontent analysisDefining and conceptualising acceptabilityhealthcare

Identifiers

PMID36910403
PMCPMC9993308

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.