Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41047277›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Exploratory mixed-methods analysis of the determinants of use of health research evidence among planning teams in Tanzania.

Pius Kagoma, Richard Mongi, Albino Kalolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Pius KagomaDepartment of Public Health and Community Nursing, The University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania, United Republic of piuskagoma@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-6139-8582
Richard MongiDepartment of Public Health and Community Nursing, The University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania, United Republic of.
Albino KaloloDepartment of Public Health, St Francis University College of Health and Allied Sciences, Morogoro, Tanzania, United Republic of.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2318-2949

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAchieving universal health coverage requires the use of health research evidence in decision-making; however, this remains understudied in lower and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Tanzania. Despite several health sector reforms and the availability of locally generated research, evidence indicates that the use of such research in health planning and decision-making remains limited in Tanzania, creating a gap between research production and its practical application. This study examined the extent of research evidence used in health planning and the factors influencing its use among health planning teams. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A sequential exploratory mixed-methods design was employed, starting with qualitative data from focus group discussions (N=6) and KIIs (N=34) with health planners from selected regions in Tanzania, recruited based on their direct involvement in health planning, using semistructured guides informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. This was followed by a quantitative survey of 422 participants meeting the same inclusion criteria, administered with a structured questionnaire derived from the model. The COM-B framework guided both tool development and analysis. Qualitative data were thematically analysed using a framework approach, yielding three themes, while quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression.

resultsQualitative findings revealed barriers such as limited knowledge and skills, inadequate access to knowledge translation tools, poor dissemination processes, financial and technical constraints, and lack of training. Opportunities included supportive guidelines, research coordinators, collaborations, dedicated budgets and improved internet access. Motivators such as job promotions, professional development, allowances and targeted training were also identified. Quantitative results showed moderate evidence use (66.2%), slightly higher than in other LMICs. Barriers included suboptimal dissemination (74.5%; OR=2.035, p=0.0008), inadequate resources (70.0%; OR=0.965, p=0.8759) and lack of training (63.7%; OR=1.361, p=0.1806). Integrated findings highlighted convergence on dissemination, resource and training challenges, with divergence in statistical significance between methods.

conclusionsBarriers related to dissemination, resources and training hinder evidence use. Interventions such as digital repositories, guideline development and capacity building, alongside institutionalised frameworks, resource allocation and accountability mechanisms, are essential to strengthen evidence-based health planning in Tanzania.

Indexed as

Health PlanningAdultDecision MakingFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTanzaniaHealth policyPrimary Health CarePUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID41047277
PMCPMC12506199

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.