ArticlePloS one2025
Mobile clinics routing and scheduling in the Witzenberg region of South Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring barriers to healthcare among internal and international female migrants in The Gambia.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite much literature on operations research applied to various healthcare problems, impactful implementation in public healthcare is limited, which often results in allocative inefficiency. This article uses a mobile clinic routing and scheduling problem in the Witzenberg region of South Africa as a case study to demonstrate the improvement of implementation success through cross-disciplinary collaboration, and also to propose a new three-stage approach for modelling a mobile clinic problem that incorporates continuity of care, fairness, and minimisation of distance travelled. Mobile clinics are used in many countries to improve access to healthcare for rural communities. Decision makers must assign farms or villages to mobile clinics, and determine their monthly visit schedules. To improve implementation success, we follow a collaborative three-phased mixed-methods approach with healthcare professionals to improve workload balance, fairness, and transportation cost. During phase 1, qualitative and quantitative data are gathered through qualitative research methods. In phase 2, fairly distributed optimal routes and schedules are designed using a three-stage model that incorporates a multi-vehicle routing problem to determine daily routes, a knapsack problem to establish a fair allocation of these daily routes between different clinics, and another variation on the vehicle routing problem to determine the monthly visit schedule that minimises the distance between the last farm visited on each consecutive day in the case of having to return to a farm the next day. Different input parameter estimations result in different routes and schedules. In phase 3, AHP is performed with main decision makers to determine their preferred solution. Final routes and schedules are designed based on model results, AHP results, and contextual input from decision makers. In our case study, an improved workload balance, a 23% reduction in total distance travelled, and buy-in to implement the changes, were obtained.
Indexed as
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.