Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40459104›Full record

ArticleAfrican journal of primary health care & family medicine2025

Improving the core functions of primary care in a Ugandan rural district.

Innocent K Besigye, Robert J Mash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African journal of primary health care & family medicine, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Innocent K BesigyeDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa; and, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Makerere University, Kampala. ibesigye@gmail.com.
Robert J Mash

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many countries, the core functions of primary care (PC) continue to perform poorly and therefore need improvement, guided by interventions developed in collaboration with key stakeholders.

aimThis paper reports on the co-design of an intervention guided by the findings of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) survey.

settingThe setting for the study was a rural Ugandan district.

methodsThis was part of a multi-stage mixed methods study to evaluate the use of the PCAT in improving primary care performance. Key stakeholders in primary care system were purposively identified to participate in the design of the intervention. The intervention co-design involved presentation and discussion of the PCAT findings, two rounds of root cause analysis, selection of intervention focus area, design of the actual intervention and planning of implementation.

resultsOngoing care was selected for intervention among the poorly performing primary care core functions. Community members' low awareness of the available services and low affiliation to their local primary health care (PHC) facility were identified as major contributors to the poor performance of ongoing care. Community dialogues as form of community engagement were selected as an intervention to improve the core primary care functions.

conclusionThe PCAT can generate findings to guide the development of interventions at the facility and district level to potentially improve the core functions of primary care.Contribution: A co-design process helped to navigate the pathway from the findings to the intervention design and its implementation strategy.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareQuality ImprovementRural Health ServicesHumansRural PopulationSurveys and QuestionnairesUgandaco-designcore functionsintervention developmentprimary careprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID40459104
PMCPMC12135737

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.