ArticleAfrican journal of primary health care & family medicine2026
Building capacity for clinical practice guideline development: Experiences from Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa.
Article in African journal of primary health care & family medicine, 2026. 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.
- Capacity development of researchers involved in guideline development in Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa: A mixed-methods study.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWithin the Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project, we offered training to guideline development group (GDG) and steering group (SG) members in Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa, to build capacity in clinical practice guideline (CPG) development.
aimThis study aimed to evaluate the capacity development of GDG and SG committee members within GELA.
settingGuideline development group members were mainly based at health or academic institutions, while SG members were mostly linked to the health ministries in Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa.
methodsWe used mixed-methods for our summative evaluation, comprising a document analysis, online surveys, semi-structured, in-depth interviews and a structured reflection. For the survey, respondents rated their confidence in knowledge, skills and behaviour before and after GELA. Data were analysed with R studio. We interviewed selected participants from all countries and analysed qualitative data through framework analysis. The author team met in-person to reflect on activities, survey findings and interview data.
resultsConfidence in CPG development skills and related behaviour increased during GELA. Qualitative themes showed an enhanced understanding and valuing of a rigorous guideline development process that should be sustained and institutionalised. The intensive nature of training, limited internet connectivity, time constraints and unmet expectations, were some reported challenges. Participants appreciated increased collaboration and opportunities for future networking. Reflections highlighted the importance of learning by doing.
conclusionGlobal Evidence, Local Adaptation built capacity of GDG and SG members to participate in rigorous CPG development through a multifaceted approach. Continued networking and collaboration of various stakeholders is key to sustain learning.Contribution: Capacity for rigorous CPG development can be built through a strategic multifaceted capacity development programme and learning by doing.
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.