ArticleBMC health services research2024
Scaling up noncommunicable disease care in a resource-limited context: lessons learned and implications for policy.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. 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.
- Perspectives on App-Assisted Self-Testing Using Rapid Diagnostic Tests Among Community Members, Health Care Providers, and Public Health Leaders in Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough primary care models for the care of common non-communicable diseases (NCD) have been developed in sub-Saharan Africa, few have described an integrated, decentralized approach at the community level. We report the results of a four-year, Ethiopian project to expand this model of NCD care to 15 primary hospitals and 45 health centres encompassing a wide geographical spread and serving a population of approximately 7.5 million people.
methodsFollowing baseline assessment of the 60 sites, 30 master trainers were used to cascade train a total of 621 health workers in the diagnosis, management and health education of the major common NCDs identified in a scoping review (hypertension, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease and epilepsy). Pre- and post-training assessments and regular mentoring visits were carried out to assess progress and remedy supply or equipment and medicines shortages and establish reporting systems. The project was accompanied by a series of community engagement activities to raise awareness and improve health seeking behaviour.
resultsA total of 643,296 people were screened for hypertension and diabetes leading to a new diagnosis in 24,313 who were started on treatment. Significant numbers of new cases of respiratory disease (3,986) and epilepsy (1,925) were also started on treatment. Mortality rates were low except among patients with hypertension in the rural health centres where 311 (10.2%) died during the project. Loss to follow up (LTFU), defined as failure to attend clinic for > 6 months despite reminders, was low in the hospitals but represented a significant problem in the urban and rural health centres with up to 20 to 30% of patients with hypertension or diabetes absenting from treatment by the end of the project. Estimates of the population disease burden enrolled within the project, however, were disappointing; asthma (0.49%), hypertension (1.7%), epilepsy (3.3%) and diabetes (3.4%).
conclusionThis project demonstrates the feasibility of scaling up integrated NCD services in a variety of locations, with fairly modest costs and a methodology that is replicable and sustainable. However, the relatively small gain in the detection and treatment of common NCDs highlights the huge challenge in making NCD services available to all.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.