ArticlePloS one2026
Stakeholder perceptions of the acceptability of an intervention to improve uptake of evidence-based emergency myocardial infarction care in Tanzania: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) but is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. To address this gap, the Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Myocardial Infarction Care (MIMIC) was developed and implemented to improve evidence-based AMI care. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perceptions of the acceptability of MIMIC following its implementation.
methodsThis qualitative study involved in-depth interviews with 20 key stakeholders (physicians, nurses, administrators, and patients diagnosed with AMI) who participated in MIMIC during the first year of implementation in the emergency department (ED) of a regional referral center in northern Tanzania. Purposive sampling was used to recruit diverse participants. Interviews were guided by a semi-structured interview guide informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed by a team of coders using an inductive, grounded theory approach guided by the seven TFA domains.
resultsNineteen major themes emerged across all TFA domains. Overall, participants described MIMIC as acceptable, minimally burdensome, and well-aligned with professional and ethical values. Perceived effectiveness was most emphasized, with staff citing improvements in AMI recognition, electrocardiogram (ECG) and troponin testing, and use of evidence-based therapies. Most components were described as effective and easily integrated into existing workflows. Patients valued the educational pamphlet for improving knowledge and self-efficacy, though staff expressed concerns about distributing it during acute care, contributing to inconsistent delivery. Champions were viewed as key in promoting adherence and sustaining implementation.
conclusionMIMIC was found to be acceptable in all seven TFA domains among ED providers and patients, with perceived effectiveness driving positive attitudes across stakeholder groups. MIMIC's co-design approach likely contributed to high intervention acceptability. Patient education strategies may require adaptation to improve fidelity. These findings support continued implementation and targeted adaptation of MIMIC.
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.