Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37438805›Full record

ArticleBMC proceedings2023

Community centred co-design methodology for designing and implementing socio-behavioural interventions to counter COVID-19 related misinformation among marginalized population living in the squatter settlements of Karachi, Pakistan: a methodology paper.

Rubina Qasim, Waqas Ahmed Farooqui, Atiya Rahman, Rukhsana Haroon, Madiha Saleem, Muhammad Rafique, Fiza Noor, Afifa Ghani, Muhammad Yaqoob, Uday Narayan Yadav and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC proceedings, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Rubina QasimDow Institute of Nursing & Midwifery, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan. Rubina.qasim@duhs.edu.pk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1663-9568
Waqas Ahmed FarooquiSchool of Public Health, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Atiya RahmanIndus College of Medical Technology & Allied Health, The Indus Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Rukhsana HaroonDow Institute of Nursing & Midwifery, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Madiha SaleemDow Institute of Nursing & Midwifery, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Muhammad RafiqueIndus College of Nursing & Midwifery, The Indus Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Fiza NoorIndus College of Nursing & Midwifery, The Indus Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Afifa GhaniDept. of Community Health Sciences, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Muhammad YaqoobDow Institute of Nursing & Midwifery, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Uday Narayan YadavCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Mohammad T YousafzaiDept. of Pediatrics & Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.

Funding

Sabin Vaccine Institute 050111-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMisinformation regarding COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination is damaging COVID-19 vaccine trust and acceptance in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC). Identification of misinformation and designing locally acceptable solutions are needed to improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. This study aimed to utilize community-led co-design methodology to evaluate misinformation regarding COVID-19 and develop contextual interventions to address misinformation in a marginalized peri urban slum communities of Landhi town Karachi, Pakistan.

methodsThis study was conducted between January and December 2021, in marginalized peri-urban slum dwellers of Muslimabad Colony, Landhi Town Karachi, Pakistan. We used a community-centred co-design methodology embedded within mixed study design to identify misinformation, co-design, test and implement locally acceptable solutions. The co-design methodology involved five stages of the design thinking model: (1) Empathize, (2) Define, (3) Ideate, (4) Prototype, and (5) Test. The project involved active engagement and participation of wide range of stakeholders and community beneficiaries (end users) including local EPI vaccinators, informal healthcare workers, religious leaders (male and female), schoolteachers (male and female), local government representatives, community leaders, housewives, youth, and general population. To develop a trusting relationship, and understand local culture, values, practices, and traditions, we allowed one month of observation period (observe, engage, watch, and listen) in the beginning, followed by door-to-door survey along with focus group discussions (FGD) and in-depth interviews (IDI) at baseline. Co-design workshops (separate for male and female) were conducted at each stage of co-design methodology to design and test locally acceptable solutions.

conclusionCommunity-centred co-design methodology was not only successful in designing, testing, and evaluating locally acceptable solutions but it also actively engaged and empowered the marginalized population living in peri urban slum communities of Karachi, Pakistan.

Indexed as

Co-designCommunity-centredCOVID-19Design thinkingMisinformationVaccine acceptance

Identifiers

PMID37438805
PMCPMC10337047

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.