Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40461057›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2025

Measuring feasibility: complex questions need complex tools.

Mary de Boer, Anna Kalbarczyk, Muhammed Nazmul Islam, Daniela C Rodríguez, Malabika Sarker, Parul Christian, Andrew Thorne Lyman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 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. 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

7 authors.

Mary de BoerInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA mdeboer5@jh.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-6774-7903
Anna KalbarczykInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6143-8634
Muhammed Nazmul IslamBRAC University James P Grant School of Public Health, Dhaka, Bangladesh.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9831-6086
Daniela C RodríguezInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Malabika SarkerBehavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Parul ChristianInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Andrew Thorne LymanInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Gates Foundation INV-033381
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We sought to assess the feasibility of mainstreaming balanced energy protein supplementation, a maternal nutrition intervention, into Bangladesh's routine antenatal care system in tandem with an ongoing effectiveness trial in northwestern Bangladesh. Feasibility is an implementation science outcome defined as the extent to which a new intervention can be implemented successfully in a given context. We found feasibility difficult to measure using existing Anglophone quantitative tools translated into Bangla and identified particular challenges with using Likert scales. We also found it challenging to measure feasibility early in implementation, as recommended in the implementation science literature, due to potential respondents' unfamiliarity with the intervention and what implementation would look like. To address these issues, we explored alternative assessment methods, such as focus groups and workshops. These formats presented additional difficulties, including identifying the correct participants and moderating participant power dynamics. In conclusion, we question whether existing feasibility assessment tools, developed in English, are suitable for use in non-Anglophone contexts as well as whether Likert scales are appropriate for use in low-income and middle-income countries more broadly. We also question current recommendations on the timing of feasibility assessments. We feel that-particularly with new, difficult-to-conceptualise interventions-feasibility must be assessed later in implementation or only after providing detailed explanations of the intervention to respondents.

Indexed as

Prenatal CareBangladeshFeasibility StudiesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansImplementation SciencePregnancyIntervention studyNutrition

Identifiers

PMID40461057
PMCPMC12142074

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.