ArticleBMJ global health2026
A systems approach to understanding injury care in LMICs using causal loop diagrams.
Article in BMJ global health, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAround 40% of mortality after injuries is avoidable with access to quality care. Investments in interventions which maximise the number of injured persons who access and receive quality care are paramount, especially in low-resourced settings. Selecting such interventions within complex adaptive health systems is challenging due to the multiple interactions within these systems.
methodsWe created a conceptual map, or causal loop diagram (CLD), representing the health system for injury care, focused on challenges to improving patient outcomes in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). We used the stages of seeking, reaching, receiving and remaining in care as the care pathway framework to conceptualise the diagram. Based on expert opinion and literature searches, we elicited micro (patient and their family), meso (health service) and macro (country context) factors which affect access to quality care at each stage of the care pathway and mapped interactions between them. Factors and their interactions were adjusted during a workshop with external experts. A CLD was created using Vensim to show relationships between all factors at all stages of the care pathway. Feedback loops within the CLD which are either reinforcing (perpetuating positive or negative change) or balancing (limiting change) were elicited. Leverage points were identified as factors which are present in multiple causal loops and are potential intervention points for maximal change.
resultsWe initially identified 41 factors affecting stage 1, 13 affecting stage 2, 51 affecting stage 3 and 49 affecting stage 4. Consolidating factors of a similar theme gave 45 unique factors for the overarching model; 13 micro, 20 meso and 12 macro. We constructed two CLDs-one for the overarching health system and the other focused on healthcare services at facilities. The health service-specific map contained 22 meso factors. We identified 928 reinforcing or balancing causal loops acting within the health system for injury care affecting health outcomes. Factors acting as leverage points involved in the largest number of feedback loops relate to trust in or perceptions of the health system (748 loops and 694 loops, respectively) and willingness to seek care (636 loops). The health service-focused CLD identified funding and the provision of quality care as the main leverage points (112 loops each). DISCUSSION: Our work, using injury care as an exemplar, moves beyond understanding the impact of factors on patient outcomes in silos. Rather, in considering comprehensive connections between all factors on outcomes, we show interactions which could lead to unintended consequences and rapidly worsen or improve health outcomes. Our identification of trust and willingness to seek care as key leverage points suggests these should be focal points for research and investment.
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.