Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries-a protocol for systematic review of literature.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1186/s13643-024-02714-x
Md Zahid Hasan, Edward J D Webb, Zahidul Quayyum, Tim Ensor
{"title":"Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries-a protocol for systematic review of literature.","authors":"Md Zahid Hasan, Edward J D Webb, Zahidul Quayyum, Tim Ensor","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02714-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Strengthening and reforming the urban primary healthcare (PHC) system is essential to efficiently deliver need-based healthcare services to the rapidly increasing urban poor population. Such reforms of PHC system need to emphasize the opinion of patients in co-designing services in order that delivery of services can be accessed effectively by the urban population in a timely and low-cost way. Hence, it is important to identify the preference of urban population while choosing healthcare providers. The aim of this proposed protocol is to summarize a planned systematic review of existing evidence on the attributes considered for choosing PHC providers in urban settings of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as classified by the World Bank. METHODS AND ANALYSES: An inclusive literature search will be conducted in electronic databases including Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus. Databases will be searched from the earliest date of entry until March 30, 2024. Database search will be supplemented by manual search of citations, reference lists, and grey literature sources. Following the pre-set inclusion and exclusion criterion, two researchers will independently screen all the retrieved studies in Covidence. Any discrepancies will be resolved through a discussion between two researchers, and if disagreements persist, a third reviewer will be consulted. The methodological quality of included studies will be appraised using checklist for Conjoint Analysis studies and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). An Excel-based data extraction table will be developed, piloted, and refined during the review process. Preference attributes will be identified and analyzed according to their types. The systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The identification of attributes, their influence on preference, and heterogeneity with socioeconomic characteristics of the population will help the policymakers and researchers to design targeted PHC interventions. Such evidence will be also useful to design choice experiment studies to quantify the preferred attributes of PHC providers in urban context of LMICs.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023409720.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"285"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02714-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Strengthening and reforming the urban primary healthcare (PHC) system is essential to efficiently deliver need-based healthcare services to the rapidly increasing urban poor population. Such reforms of PHC system need to emphasize the opinion of patients in co-designing services in order that delivery of services can be accessed effectively by the urban population in a timely and low-cost way. Hence, it is important to identify the preference of urban population while choosing healthcare providers. The aim of this proposed protocol is to summarize a planned systematic review of existing evidence on the attributes considered for choosing PHC providers in urban settings of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as classified by the World Bank. METHODS AND ANALYSES: An inclusive literature search will be conducted in electronic databases including Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus. Databases will be searched from the earliest date of entry until March 30, 2024. Database search will be supplemented by manual search of citations, reference lists, and grey literature sources. Following the pre-set inclusion and exclusion criterion, two researchers will independently screen all the retrieved studies in Covidence. Any discrepancies will be resolved through a discussion between two researchers, and if disagreements persist, a third reviewer will be consulted. The methodological quality of included studies will be appraised using checklist for Conjoint Analysis studies and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). An Excel-based data extraction table will be developed, piloted, and refined during the review process. Preference attributes will be identified and analyzed according to their types. The systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Discussion: The identification of attributes, their influence on preference, and heterogeneity with socioeconomic characteristics of the population will help the policymakers and researchers to design targeted PHC interventions. Such evidence will be also useful to design choice experiment studies to quantify the preferred attributes of PHC providers in urban context of LMICs.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023409720.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中低收入国家城市地区居民对初级医疗服务提供者的选择--文献系统性回顾协议。
导言:加强和改革城市初级医疗保健(PHC)系统对于向迅速增加的城市贫困人口有效提供以需求为基础的医疗保健服务至关重要。初级医疗保健系统的这种改革需要强调患者在共同设计服务时的意见,以便城市人口能够以低成本的方式及时有效地获得服务。因此,确定城市人口在选择医疗服务提供者时的偏好非常重要。本建议书旨在对现有证据进行有计划的系统综述,这些证据涉及在世界银行划分的中低收入国家(LMIC)的城市环境中选择初级保健服务提供者时所考虑的属性。方法与分析:将在 Pubmed/MEDLINE、Embase、Global Health、Cochrane Library、Web of Science 和 Scopus 等电子数据库中进行全面的文献检索。数据库将从最早的输入日期开始搜索,直至 2024 年 3 月 30 日。除数据库检索外,还将对引文、参考文献目录和灰色文献来源进行人工检索。按照预先设定的纳入和排除标准,两名研究人员将在 Covidence 中独立筛选所有检索到的研究。如有任何分歧,两名研究人员将通过讨论解决;如果分歧持续存在,将咨询第三位审稿人。纳入研究的方法学质量将通过联合分析研究检查表和混合方法评估工具(MMAT)进行评估。在评审过程中,将开发、试用和完善基于 Excel 的数据提取表。将根据偏好属性的类型对其进行识别和分析。系统综述将根据系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行报告:讨论:确定属性、其对偏好的影响以及与人口社会经济特征的异质性将有助于政策制定者和研究人员设计有针对性的初级保健干预措施。这些证据还有助于设计选择实验研究,以量化低收入国家城市中初级保健服务提供者的偏好属性:系统综述注册:prospero crd42023409720。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
期刊最新文献
Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries-a protocol for systematic review of literature. Computer-assisted screening in systematic evidence synthesis requires robust and well-evaluated stopping criteria. Patient-related prognostic factors for function and pain after shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. The psychometric properties of instruments measuring ethical sensitivity in nursing: a systematic review. Barriers and facilitators to enrollment in pediatric clinical trials: an overview of systematic reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1