ArticleDialogues in health2026
Using the Normalization Process Theory to study facilitators and barriers to sustainable implementation of artificial intelligence-based diabetic retinopathy screening in Rwanda.
Article in Dialogues in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rising incidence of diabetes and its complications, particularly diabetic retinopathy (DR), in sub-Saharan Africa presents a significant public health challenge, compounded by a lack of skilled human resources. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based screening offers a promising way to address this burden. Understanding the integration of such complex interventions from research to routine clinical practice is crucial for sustainability. Methods: A qualitative study design was employed using the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) framework, which supports the evaluation of whether an innovation will be sustainable in everyday practice by analysing how new practices become embedded into routine work. Clinical staff and patients involved in AI-based DR screening at three clinics in Kigali, Rwanda were interviewed using an NPT-based questionnaire through semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Verbal consent was obtained for recording and transcription. Interview data were thematically analysed, with codes generated to align with the four NPT constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. Findings: In total, nine clinical staff members and 67 patient participants were interviewed. Participants reported a coherent understanding of the program's purpose, value, and benefits. They valued the technology for its ability to address the gap between the scarcity of competent healthcare providers and the growing burden of DR. Challenges identified related to workload, division of labour, initial patient distrust of AI, and restrictive organizational policies regarding operator access. Interpretation: The NPT framework proved valuable for analysing the implementation of this complex intervention, providing insights into user perceptions and generating actionable recommendations for enhancement. While positive adoption was observed, further research is needed to fully understand the intervention's long-term impact on health outcomes such as visual preservation and treatment success. Funding: Fundus cameras were donated by Topcon. The company had no input into the design and/or analysis of the study.
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.