Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40017989›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2025

Implementation fidelity of a multisite maternity waiting homes programme in rural Zambia: application of the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity to a complex, hybrid-design study.

Thandiwe Ngoma, Jeanette L Kaiser, Allison J Morgan, Taryn Vian, Davidson H Hamer, Peter C Rockers, Viviane Sakanga, Godfrey Biemba, Misheck Bwalya, Nancy A Scott

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02620436 (Increasing Equitable Access to Safe Deliveries in Zambia), which is not on this 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.

NCT02620436 nacompletednot on this map

Increasing Equitable Access to Safe Deliveries in Zambia

TypeinterventionalSponsorBoston UniversityRan2016 to 2018Enrolled4,798ConditionsMaternal HealthArmsCore Mother Shelter Model
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Thandiwe NgomaDeparment of Research, Right to Care Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.ORCID 0000-0003-2643-5021
Jeanette L KaiserDepartment of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Allison J MorganDepartment of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Taryn VianSchool of Nursing and Health Professions, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Davidson H HamerDepartment of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Peter C RockersDepartment of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Viviane SakangaAMREF Health Africa, Lusaka, Zambia.
Godfrey BiembaNational Health Research Authority, Pediatric Centre of Excellence, Lusaka, Zambia.
Misheck BwalyaMothers2mothers Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Nancy A ScottDepartment of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Implementation fidelity measures are critical for understanding complex interventions. Though maternity waiting homes (MWHs) are recommended by the WHO and have been used to help pregnant women access health facilities for decades, a gap exists regarding fidelity studies on MWHs. To better understand intervention outcomes results, we assessed the fidelity of implementation of an improved Core MWH Model in 10 facilities in rural Zambia. Methods: We analysed indicators for fidelity employing a widely used conceptual framework. We compared performance from October 2016 to July 2018 to goals set out during intervention design. The Core MWH Model consists of three pillars-infrastructure, policies and linkages to care-each designed to be culturally appropriate and responsive to community standards for safety and comfort. Results: 70% of sites exhibited high adherence to the Core MWH Model components. User experience corroborated poorer performing elements: insufficient lighting, small cooking spaces, non-locking cabinets and few educational classes. Mission statements and governing documents were not always visible or available. The proportion of 3206 users who came from>10 km away was higher than the proportion of the surrounding population living at that distance except in two sites with low populations of remote-living women. Women stayed for just below the target of 14 nights. MWH occupancy rate overall was lower (52%) than the target (80%). MWH users reported high quality and satisfaction. Only three MWHs reached 50% female membership on their governance committees but met other key indicators for community ownership and engagement. Conclusions: This fidelity evaluation of an MWH model in rural Zambia helps bridge the evidence-practice gap for the WHO's recommendation on implementing MWHs and adds to the expanding body of literature on implementation fidelity studies in global health. Trial registration number: NCT02620436.

Indexed as

methodsPreventive MedicinePublic Health

Identifiers

PMID40017989
PMCPMC11812881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.