Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38326871›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts.

Janet Perkins, Sarah Nelson, Emma Birley, Emilie Mcswiggan, Marshall Dozier, Anna McCarthy, Nadege Atkins, Eldad Agyei-Manu, Jasmin Rostron, Koichi Kameda and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Janet PerkinsDepartment of Social Anthropology, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Chrystal Macmillan Building, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, Scotland, UK. janet.perkins@ed.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2868-1752
Sarah NelsonCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.
Emma BirleyCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.
Emilie McswigganCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.
Marshall DozierLibrary Academic Support Team, Library & University Collections, and Information Services University of Edinburgh, Argyle House, 3 Lady Lawson Street, Edinburgh, EH3 9DR, Scotland, UK.
Anna McCarthyDepartment of Social Work, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Chrystal Macmillan Building, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, Scotland, UK.
Nadege AtkinsCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.
Eldad Agyei-ManuCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2712-0198
Jasmin RostronCentre for Population Health Sciences, Old Medical School, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2960-2892
Koichi KamedaCentre Population et Développement (CEPED), 45 Rue Des Saints-Pères, 75006, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1337-6501
Ann KellyDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, Bush House North East Wing, 30 Aldwych, London, WC2B 4BG, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4658-2133
Clare ChandlerDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6499-7522
Alice StreetDepartment of Social Anthropology, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Chrystal Macmillan Building, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, Scotland, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7874-0234

Funding

European Research Council 715450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQualitative social research has made valuable contributions to understanding technology-based interventions in global health. However, we have little evidence of who is carrying out this research, where, how, for what purpose, or the overall scope of this body of work. To address these questions, we undertook a systematic evidence mapping of one area of technology-focused research in global health, related to the development, deployment and use of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe conducted an exhaustive search to identify papers reporting on primary qualitative studies that explore the development, deployment, and use of POCTs in LMICs and screened results to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included studies and descriptive analyses were conducted.

resultsOne hundred thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria, with numbers increasing year by year. Funding of studies was primarily credited to high income country (HIC)-based institutions (95%) and 64% of first authors were affiliated with HIC-based institutions. Study sites, in contrast, were concentrated in a small number of LMICs. Relatively few studies examined social phenomena related to POCTs that take place in HICs. Seventy-one percent of papers reported on studies conducted within the context of a trial or intervention. Eighty percent reported on studies considering POCTs for HIV and/or malaria. Studies overwhelmingly reported on POCT use (91%) within primary-level health facilities (60%) or in hospitals (30%) and explored the perspectives of the health workforce (70%).

conclusionsA reflexive approach to the role, status, and contribution of qualitative and social science research is crucial to identifying the contributions it can make to the production of global health knowledge and understanding the roles technology can play in achieving global health goals. The body of qualitative social research on POCTs for LMICs is highly concentrated in scope, overwhelmingly focuses on testing in the context of a narrow number of donor-supported initiatives and is driven by HIC resources and expertise. To optimise the full potential of qualitative social research requires the promotion of open and just research ecosystems that broaden the scope of inquiry beyond established public health paradigms and build social science capacity in LMICs.

Indexed as

EcosystemGlobal HealthDeveloping CountriesHumansIncomePoint-of-Care TestingDecolonisationDeveloping countriesDiagnosisGlobal healthLow- and middle-income countriesPoint-of-care testingQualitative researchSocial sciencesSystematic evidence mapping

Identifiers

PMID38326871
PMCPMC10848363

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.