ArticleBMC medical education2025
Using operational research as a tool to improve eye health services and systems in low-and middle-income settings: lessons from India and Nepal.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOperational Research (OR), as part of a quality assurance program, has become a standard feature of most health institutions in most high-income countries. In contrast, in low-income settings, operational research is less common, and almost no one has asssed operational research capacity building (ORCB) as a tool to improve efficacy, efficiency and quality in these settings. This study evaluated the impact of an ORCB program on participants' research competencies and the extent to which research findings were implemented in practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study combined quantitative and qualitative data to evaluate an ORCB intervention in eye hospitals in Nepal (3 sites) and northern India (1 site) from 2019 to 2022. A self-reported questionnaire was administered at the end of the study period, and formal interviews were conducted. The questionnaire covered knowledge improvement, practice implementation, and motivating and challenging factors. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests to compare pre- and post-training scores. Qualitative data were gathered through interviews and observations and analysed thematically.
resultsThe program demonstrated significant improvements in participants' research knowledge gain. Quantitative analysis revealed substantial gains in knowledge (p-values < 0.05 for all domains). Post-training, 66.7% developed study protocols, and 60% trained other staff or students. Qualitative feedback indicated overall positive impacts, including enhanced research and operational activities. However, reported challenges such as inconsistent mentorship quality, poor internet connectivity during online sessions, and difficulty in balancing clinical work with research. Despite these challenges, there was notable improvement in research practice and internal training within hospitals, and the program's approach was appreciated for its effectiveness.
conclusionThe study highlights the need for standardized training modules, consistent mentorship, and stronger institutional support. Building operational research capacity in resource-poor settings with limited administrative staff and weak data infrastructure improves individual staff knowledge and skills. Participants learned about scientific principles of reliability and validity and their importance to efforts to improve service equity, efficiency, and effectiveness.
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.