SynthesisBMC medicine2026
Experiences and service-uptake factors of receiving and providing care for meningitis and its sequelae: a qualitative systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2026. 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeningitis is a life-threatening condition with substantial morbidity and mortality, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While quantitative research has enhanced the understanding of diagnostic and treatment efficacy, qualitative data regarding the lived experiences remain underexplored. This systematic review synthesises qualitative evidence on the experiences of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers regarding meningitis diagnosis, treatment, and care, as well as the barriers and facilitators influencing service uptake and provision. The review aimed to inform the development of World Health Organization guidelines for improving meningitis care.
methodsThis systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024514413). A comprehensive search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL was conducted on February 13-14, 2024. Studies were included if they explored patient, caregiver, or healthcare provider experiences with meningitis or sequelae diagnosis, treatment, or long-term management. Thematic synthesis was used for data analysis. Quality assessment of each included study was performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Confidence of evidence was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach.
resultsOut of 4735 identified studies, 19 were included in the final synthesis; seven were conducted in LMICs and 12 in high-income countries (HICs). The synthesis identified four overarching analytical constructs: diagnostic uncertainty and disparities in initial help-seeking; systemic and operational constraints on acute care delivery; the relational and psychological burden of meningitis; and barriers to long-term equity and continuity of care. Key themes included diagnostic challenges, delays in care-seeking due to cultural and socioeconomic barriers, and miscommunication between patients and healthcare providers. Critical barriers to care included systemic healthcare limitations, financial constraints, and inadequate public awareness of meningitis symptoms. Limited data on facilitators of timely care uptake were found.
conclusionsThis synthesis highlights substantial context-specific disparities in meningitis care. In LMICs, the primary points of failure relate to access and resources, with financial barriers, cultural reliance on traditional healing, and systemic operational limitations impeding timely diagnosis and treatment. In HICs, the challenges are rooted in clinical processes and support systems, particularly healthcare workers' diagnostic uncertainty, failures in patient-provider communication, and the absence of psychological support. Addressing these barriers through culturally sensitive interventions, improved healthcare infrastructure, enhanced patient-provider communication, and public health education is essential.
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.