ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Anaesthesia delivery systems in low and lower-middle-income Asian countries: A scoping review of capacity and effectiveness.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Access and barriers to safe anesthesia in primary health care settings in India.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Review
- Global anaesthesia practice using inguinal hernia surgery as a tracer condition: a secondary analysis of an international prospective cohort study.Anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Protocol development and feasibility of the PEACH in Asia study: A pilot study on PEri-anesthetic morbidity in CHildren in Asia.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Literature on anaesthesia systems in low and lower middle-income countries is limited, focused on the Africa region, and provides minimal data on anaesthesia or associated disciplines within intensive care, pain management and emergency medicine. We thus conducted a scoping review of primary and secondary research literature on capacity and effectiveness of anaesthesia delivery in low and lower middle-income countries in the Asia region from 2000-2021, to clarify existing knowledge, important gaps, and possible subsequent steps. We applied Arksey and O'Malley's scoping literature review method to search five databases (i.e. EMBASE, CINAHL, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), screen, extract, and synthesise data under three themes: (i) availability and type of anaesthesia workforce; (ii) anaesthesia system infrastructure, equipment, and supplies; and (iii) effectiveness of anaesthesia provision. We included 25 eligible sources of 603 identified. Only ten (40%) were published in the last 5 years and Asian lower-income countries were primarily represented in 15 multi-country sources. Fifteen (60%) sources used quantitative methods and provided limited information on data collection, e.g. sampling criteria or geographic areas included. No sources included countrywide data, despite anaesthesia delivery and resources differing significantly sub-nationally (e.g. central versus rural/remote, or insecure areas). Data on anaesthesiology delivery were limited, with findings including insufficiencies in workforce, supplies, training, and skills-building of anaesthesia personnel, along with the lack of consistent strategies for overcoming maldistribution of resources and improving anaesthesia delivery systems in the region. This review, a first attempt to synthesise existing data on anaesthesia delivery systems in low and lower-middle-income Asian countries, shows the anaesthesia literature is still limited. Findings highlight the urgent need for additional research and collaboration nationally and regionally to strengthen anaesthesia delivery and surgical facilities in resource-constrained settings.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.