Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39595660›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024

Development of Priority Assistive Product Lists in Three African Countries.

Emma M Smith, Ying Zhang, Laura Ligthart, Ikenna D Ebuenyi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

4 authors.

Emma M SmithAssisting Living and Learning Institute, Maynooth University, W23 H2H6 Maynooth, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-2541-5723
Ying ZhangFaculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Laura LigthartFaculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ikenna D EbuenyiDepartment of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3329-6296

Funding

Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office of the United Kingdom, Administered by GDI Hub. N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

National Assistive Product Lists (APLs) play an important role in improving access to assistive products (APs). Assistive products are critical to enhancing the health, well-being, and quality of life of persons with disabilities and other functional limitations, including those associated with aging. Comparing national APL development across Malawi, Liberia, and Sierra Leone may provide insight into the differences between the resulting national APLs and how to enhance AP service delivery systems. The aim of this study was to compare how the World Health Organization's 5Ps model (people, personnel, policy, provision, products) influenced national APL development across Malawi, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. To achieve this aim, we conducted a series of qualitative interviews with representatives of key government and non-state organizations (n = 12) who had been involved in the development of the APL in each of the three countries. We used directed content analysis to review and analyze the resulting data, with the 5Ps representing the 5 areas of analysis. Our results found substantial differences between the APLs of the three countries, which were substantially influenced by the needs of assistive technology users in each of the respective countries (people). This was evident in the fact that product selection criteria differed across countries, with the most critical factor being population need. Provision systems were generally fragmented and depended heavily on donors, with a lack of coordination between the public and private sectors. None of the countries had or produced a standalone AT policy in the APL development process. County-specific factors also influenced the APL differences between countries. Our research concludes that national APLs will vary substantially if they are developed collaboratively, considering the needs of the population with consideration for the country's context and existing policies and systems.

Indexed as

Self-Help DevicesHumansLiberiaMalawiPersons with DisabilitiesSierra LeoneAfricanassistive technologypolicyproducts

Identifiers

PMID39595660
PMCPMC11593628

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.