Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37773920›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

How a co-design process led to more contextually relevant family planning interventions in emerging urban settings in Eastern Uganda.

Jacquellyn Nambi Ssanyu, Rornald Muhumuza Kananura, Catherine Birabwa, Felix Kizito, Sarah Namutamba, Dorothy Akongo, Elizabeth Namara, Moses Kyangwa, Henry Kaula, Doreen Nakimuli and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jacquellyn Nambi SsanyuDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0417-6030
Rornald Muhumuza KananuraDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9915-1989
Catherine BirabwaDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Felix KizitoBusoga Health Forum, Jinja, Uganda.
Sarah NamutambaBusoga Health Forum, Jinja, Uganda.
Dorothy AkongoBusoga Health Forum, Jinja, Uganda.
Elizabeth NamaraBusoga Health Forum, Jinja, Uganda.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6837-1655
Moses KyangwaBusoga Health Forum, Jinja, Uganda.
Henry KaulaKampala Slum Maternal and Newborn Health Project, Kampala Capital City Authority, Kampala, Uganda.
Doreen NakimuliPopulation Services International, Kampala, Uganda.
Andrew MagundaKampala Slum Maternal and Newborn Health Project, Kampala Capital City Authority, Kampala, Uganda.
Othman KakaireDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, Makerere university College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Peter WaiswaDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Innovations for Poverty Action · UGKampala Capital City Authority · UGMakerere University · UGUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Voluntary, rights-based family planning upholds women's right to determine freely the number and spacing of their children. However, low-resource settings like Uganda still face a high unmet need for family planning. And, while urban areas are often indicated to have better access to health services, emerging evidence is revealing intra-urban socio-economic differentials in family planning utilization. To address the barriers to contraceptive use in these settings, understanding community-specific challenges and involving them in tailored intervention design is crucial. This paper describes the use of co-design, a human-centred design tool, to develop context-specific interventions that promote voluntary family planning in urban settings in Eastern Uganda. A five-stage co-design approach was used: 1) Empathize: primary data was collected to understand the problem and people involved, 2) Define: findings were shared with 56 participants in a three-day in-person co-design workshop, including community members, family planning service providers and leaders, 3) Ideate: workshop participants generated potential solutions, 4) Prototype: participants prioritized prototypes, and 5) Testing: user feedback was sought about the prototypes. A package of ten interventions was developed. Five interventions targeted demand-side barriers to family planning uptake, four targeted supply-side barriers, and one addressed leadership and governance barriers. Involving a diverse group of co-creators provided varied experiences and expertise to develop the interventions. Participants expressed satisfaction with their involvement in finding solutions to challenges in their communities. However, power imbalances and language barriers were identified by the participants as potential barriers to positive group dynamics and discussion quality. To address them, participants were separated into groups, and medical terminologies were simplified during brainstorming sessions. These changes improved participation and maximized the contributions of all participants. It is therefore important to consider participant characteristics and their potential impact on the process, especially when engaging diverse participant groups, and implement measures to mitigate their effects.

Identifiers

PMID37773920
PMCPMC10540946
OpenAlexW4387167181

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.