ArticleBMJ open2026
Basic management of life-threatening emergencies in primary healthcare centres: a systematic review protocol on obstacles and facilitators.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Child marriage in Iran: a protocol for a scoping review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Infertility treatment experiences in Iran: protocol for a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Voice as a predictive signal: protocol for a scoping review of AI in early childhood development.BMJ open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrimary healthcare (PHC) emergency services are critical as the first line of defence against life-threatening conditions, significantly reducing mortality and morbidity. Globally, life-threatening emergencies (LTEs) such as acute myocardial infarction, stroke, severe trauma and respiratory failure frequently present first at PHC centres, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. However, inadequate emergency preparedness at the primary care level contributes to substantial avoidable mortality and long-term disability. Many PHC centres, especially in underserved and rural areas, face substantial challenges including inadequate equipment, insufficient training and poor referral systems which compromise emergency care quality and outcomes. Despite the recognised importance of PHC in emergency care, there is currently no synthesised evidence comprehensively mapping the barriers and facilitators that influence LTE management at this level. This systematic review aims to synthesise evidence on barriers and facilitators in managing LTEs at PHC centres to inform effective interventions and policy development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will comprehensively search PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science for relevant literature published up to 31 May 2026. In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, two independent researchers will conduct a three-stage screening process: initial title/abstract evaluation, full-text assessment and manual review of reference lists. Any disagreements between reviewers will be adjudicated by the lead investigator. The eligibility criteria and research question will be established using the SPIDER framework, which examines Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation and Research Type components. Methodological quality will be appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (2018). Extracted data will be systematically collected using a standardised form. A 'best fit' framework synthesis approach, complemented by thematic analysis, will be employed to integrate qualitative evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol for this systematic review has received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (approval number: IR.TBZMED.VCR.REC.1404.061). The committee confirmed that the study objectives do not involve direct patient contact or clinical interventions, and therefore, the review meets ethical standards for research based exclusively on published literature. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and policy briefs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Registration number PROSPERO CRD420251071584.
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.