Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37626322›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Taking stock of population-level interventions targeting risk factors for hypertension and diabetes in Rwanda and South Africa: methodological reflections and lessons learnt from conducting a multi-component situational analysis.

Uwimana Nicol J, Nganabashaka Jp, Tumusiime Kd, Young T, Rehfuess E, Burns J

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Uwimana Nicol J *Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa. jeannine@sun.ac.za.
Nganabashaka Jp *College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
Tumusiime KdCollege of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
Young TDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Rehfuess EInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology (IBE), Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Burns JInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology (IBE), Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Stellenbosch University · ZAUniversity of Rwanda · RWZimmer Biomet (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypertension and diabetes are on the rise both in Rwanda and South Africa. The responsibility for NCD risk factors cut across different sectors, which makes it complex to effectively manage. Policy-relevant intervention research is thus critical for addressing the NCD challenge. We conducted a situational analysis in both countries to identify and describe current population-level interventions targeting risk factors for diabetes and hypertension. This paper presents this methodology and shares challenges encountered, and lessons learnt in applying the methodology.

methodsWe describe a multi-component methodology for conducting a situational analysis, which included a desk review, stakeholder mapping, survey, key informant interviews, and a consultative workshop. This methodology was applied in a standardized manner in two African countries. Following the analysis, the authors held iterative team consultations to reflect on challenges and lessons learnt during this process.

resultsKey challenges and lessons learnt relate to i) stakeholder recruitment, engagement and retainment; ii) utilization and triangulation of multiple sources of data; and iii) evolving circumstances, particularly related to the Covid-19 pandemic. It proved challenging to recruit stakeholders outside the health sector and in the private sector, as they often do not consider themselves as making or influencing policies and thus were reluctant to engage. The difficulties with responsiveness were often overcome through face-to-face visits, an opportunity to explain the relevance of their participation. With regards to health sector stakeholders and all other stakeholders, continued engagement over prolonged periods of time also turned out to be challenging. Covid-19 restrictions were preserved to be an impediment throughout the conduct of the situational analysis, specifically in South Africa. The use of multi-stage mixed methods was found to be appropriate for addressing the study objectives, as each step yielded unique data, concepts, and perspectives that complemented the other data.

conclusionConducting a situational analysis is crucial for understanding the current state of interventions and identifying opportunities for new interventions. The multi-component methodology used in two African countries was found to be feasible, appropriate, and informative. Others planning to conduct situational analysis may follow, adapt and improve upon our approach, reacting to the challenges encountered.

Indexed as

COVID-19Diabetes MellitusHypertensionNoncommunicable DiseasesHumansPandemicsRisk FactorsRwandaSouth AfricaChallengesDiabetesHypertensionLessons learntMethodologyMulti-componentNon-communicable diseasesPopulation level interventionsRwanda and South AfricaSituational analysis

Identifiers

PMID37626322
PMCPMC10464209
OpenAlexW4386162298

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.