ArticleBMJ open2025
Factors associated with the adoption of the WHO Package of Essential Non-Communicable Diseases (PEN) Protocol 1 in primary healthcare settings in Nepal: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Integration of Cardiovascular Disease Services within Primary Health Care Systems: Insights from South Asia.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess factors associated with the adoption of the WHO Package of Essential Non-Communicable Diseases (PEN) Protocol 1 at primary healthcare (PHC) facilities in Nepal after healthcare workers received training.
designCross-sectional study.
settingPHC facilities across various provinces in Nepal.
participantsA total of 180 healthcare workers trained in PEN, recruited from a random selection of 105 basic healthcare facilities.
main outcome measuresThe adoption of PEN Protocol 1 components: blood pressure measurement, blood glucose screening, 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment using WHO/International Society of Hypertension risk charts and body mass index (BMI) assessment. Factors associated with protocol adoption were assessed using generalised estimating equations for ORs.
resultsAmong participants, 100% reported measuring blood pressure, while 56% measured blood sugar, 28% assessed CVD risk and 27% assessed BMI. The adoption of the CVD risk prediction chart was positively associated with the availability of amlodipine (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.00; 95% CI 1.09 to 8.27). The adoption of BMI assessment was positively associated with access to a stadiometer (aOR 3.23; 95% CI 1.26 to 8.30) and a glucometer (aOR 3.07; 95% CI 1.12 to 8.40), and negatively associated with lack of motivation/inertia of previous practice (aOR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.87) and environmental factors such as lack of time and resources (aOR 0.57; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89). Blood glucose level measurements were positively associated with being at a PHC centre (aOR 7.34; 95% CI 2.79 to 19.3) and the availability of metformin (OR 2.40; 95% CI 1.08 to 5.29).
conclusionAdoption of PEN Protocol 1 varied by component and was influenced by resource availability, provider motivation and system barriers. Addressing these factors is key to optimising implementation in low-resource settings.
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.