ArticlePLOS global public health2025
An intervention mapping approach to the development and evaluation of a community-based prostate cancer early detection programme in Nigeria.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. 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
Interventions are needed to reduce the global disparity in prostate cancer outcomes. Our research aimed to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness of a stakeholder-developed intervention for the early detection of prostate cancer in Nigeria. This was a mixed methods study conducted at three cities in Nigeria. The intervention mapping framework was utilized as the primary framework for the study. During intervention development, a six-member team developed an implementation research logic model and then conducted stakeholder engagement to prioritize the preliminary intervention strategies among 12 purposively selected stakeholders. This was followed by brainstorming sessions by the same intervention development team for the selection of multi-faceted intervention strategies. Key informant interviews were then conducted among 10 purposively selected Nigerian clinicians, institutional leaders, and policymakers for contextual inquiry on the developed intervention. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis were performed. At the end of the intervention development process, the primary intervention strategies included supported risk assessment and patient navigation. The secondary strategies were education and training, and cancer information communication. The main actors of the intervention were trained community-based healthcare providers while the targeted population were adult men 40 years and above. The informants strongly noted that the intervention actions were feasible. Regarding acceptability, informants strongly believed that the intervention had numerous relative advantages but noted its complexity and the potential risk for overdiagnosis. Informants also consistently acknowledged that the intervention was appropriate but had mixed disposition on implementation preparedness. Further adaptations were made to address the stakeholder-identified gaps. In conclusion, this study developed a prostate cancer early detection intervention with preliminary feasibility, the first rigorously developed systems-strengthening intervention to optimize the detection of early-stage prostate cancer in Nigeria. A pilot implementation trial will be helpful in further testing the intervention in the field setting.
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.