Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Research

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts

Authors: Janet Perkins, Sarah Nelson, Emma Birley, Emilie Mcswiggan, Marshall Dozier, Anna McCarthy, Nadege Atkins, Eldad Agyei-Manu, Jasmin Rostron, Koichi Kameda, Ann Kelly, Clare Chandler, Alice Street

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Qualitative social research has made valuable contributions to understanding technology-based interventions in global health. However, we have little evidence of who is carrying out this research, where, how, for what purpose, or the overall scope of this body of work. To address these questions, we undertook a systematic evidence mapping of one area of technology-focused research in global health, related to the development, deployment and use of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

We conducted an exhaustive search to identify papers reporting on primary qualitative studies that explore the development, deployment, and use of POCTs in LMICs and screened results to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included studies and descriptive analyses were conducted.

Results

One hundred thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria, with numbers increasing year by year. Funding of studies was primarily credited to high income country (HIC)-based institutions (95%) and 64% of first authors were affiliated with HIC-based institutions. Study sites, in contrast, were concentrated in a small number of LMICs. Relatively few studies examined social phenomena related to POCTs that take place in HICs. Seventy-one percent of papers reported on studies conducted within the context of a trial or intervention. Eighty percent reported on studies considering POCTs for HIV and/or malaria. Studies overwhelmingly reported on POCT use (91%) within primary-level health facilities (60%) or in hospitals (30%) and explored the perspectives of the health workforce (70%).

Conclusions

A reflexive approach to the role, status, and contribution of qualitative and social science research is crucial to identifying the contributions it can make to the production of global health knowledge and understanding the roles technology can play in achieving global health goals. The body of qualitative social research on POCTs for LMICs is highly concentrated in scope, overwhelmingly focuses on testing in the context of a narrow number of donor-supported initiatives and is driven by HIC resources and expertise. To optimise the full potential of qualitative social research requires the promotion of open and just research ecosystems that broaden the scope of inquiry beyond established public health paradigms and build social science capacity in LMICs.

Available only for authorised users

While this figure suggests a linearity of the POCT life cycle, we recognise the life cycle as not linear, but iterative, with particular moments informing other moments across the cycle (see also Engel, 2020).

Packard RM. A history of global health: interventions into the lives of other peoples. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2016.CrossRef

Biehl J, Petryna A. When people come first: critical studies in global health. Princeton Oxford: Princeton University Press; 2013.CrossRef

Adams V, Behague D, Caduff C, Löwy I, Ortega F. Re-imagining global health through social medicine. Glob Public Health. 2019;14(10):1383–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2019.1587639.CrossRefPubMed

Shiffman J, Shawar YR. Framing and the formation of global health priorities. Lancet. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00584-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Street A. The testing revolution: investigating diagnostic devices in global health. Somatosphere. 2018;9. Available from: http://somatosphere.net/2018/testing-revolution.html/.

Stickley T, O’Caithain A, Homer C. The value of qualitative methods to public health research, policy and practice. Perspect Public Health. 2022;142(4):237–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/17579139221083814.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Greenhalgh T, Annandale E, Ashcroft R, Barlow J, Black N, Bleakley A, et al. An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. BMJ. 2016;352. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i563.

Loder E, Groves T, Schroter S, Merino JG, Weber W. Qualitative research and the BMJ. BMJ. 2016;352. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i641.

Storeng KT, Mishra A. Politics and practices of global health: critical ethnographies of health systems. Glob Public Health. 2014;9(8):858–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2014.941901.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Street A, Kelly AH. Introduction: Diagnostics, medical testing, and value in medical anthropology. Med Anthropol Theor. 2021;8(2):1–16. https://doi.org/10.17157/mat.8.2.6516.CrossRef

11.

Macdonald H, Harper I. Understanding tuberculosis and its control: anthropological and ethnographic approaches. London: Routledge; 2019.CrossRef

12.

Wallace LJ, MacDonald ME, Storeng KT. Anthropologies of global maternal and reproductive health: from policy spaces to sites of practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG; 2022.CrossRef

13.

Engel N, Ochodo EA, Karanja PW, Schmidt B-M, Janssen R, Steingart KR, et al. Rapid molecular tests for tuberculosis and tuberculosis drug resistance: a qualitative evidence synthesis of recipient and provider views. Cochr Database Syst Rev. 2022(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014877.pub2.

14.

Odendaal WA, Watkins JA, Leon N, Goudge J, Griffiths F, Tomlinson M, et al. Health workers’ perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011942.pub2.

15.

Drain PK, Hyle EP, Noubary F, Freedberg KA, Wilson D, Bishai WR, et al. Diagnostic point-of-care tests in resource-limited settings. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(3):239–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70250-0.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Mitra P, Sharma P. POCT in developing countries. EJIFCC. 2021;32(2):195.PubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Peeling R, Mabey D. Point-of-care tests for diagnosing infections in the developing world. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;16(8):1062–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03279.x.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Pai NP, Vadnais C, Denkinger C, Engel N, Pai M. Point-of-care testing for infectious diseases: diversity, complexity, and barriers in low-and middle-income countries. PLoS Medine. 2012;9:e1001306. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001306.CrossRef

19.

Moussy FG, Berumen AV, Pai M. The WHO list of essential in vitro diagnostics: development and next steps. EBioMedicine. 2018;37:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.10.070.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Pai M, Kohli M. Essential diagnostics: a key element of universal health coverage. Dr Sulaiman Al Habib Med J. 2019;1:3–7. https://doi.org/10.2991/dsahmj.k.190225.001.CrossRef

21.

FIND. Call to G20 leaders to uphold diagnostics and equitable access to testing 2021 [Available from: https://www.finddx.org/what-we-do/advocacy/call-to-g20-leaders-to-uphold-diagnostics-and-equitable-access-to-testing/. Accessed: 24 Oct 2022

22.

World Health Organization. First WHO model list of essential in vitro diagnostics. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. Report No.: 9241210265 Contract No.: 1017. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/311567

23.

Pai M, Walia K, Boehme CC. Essential medicines and essential diagnostics: a package deal. Lancet Publ Health. 2019;4(10):e492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30165-3.CrossRef

24.

World Health Organization. Second WHO model list of essential in vitro diagnostics. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-MVP-EMP-2019.05

25.

World Health Organization. The selection and use of essential in vitro diagnostics: report of the third meeting of the WHO strategic advisory group of experts on in vitro diagnostics, 2020 (including the third WHO model list of essential in vitro diagnostics). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. Report No.: 9240019103 Contract No.: 1031. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240019102

26.

Fleming KA, Horton S, Wilson ML, Atun R, DeStigter K, Flanigan J, et al. The lancet commission on diagnostics: transforming access to diagnostics. Lancet. 2021;398(10315):1997–2050. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00673-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Papola D, Purgato M, Gastaldon C, Bovo C, van Ommeren M, Barbui C, et al. Psychological and social interventions for the prevention of mental disorders in people living in low-and middle-income countries affected by humanitarian crises. Cochr Database Syst Rev. 2020(9). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012417.pub2.

28.

Van Hecke O, Raymond M, Lee JJ, Turner P, Goyder CR, Verbakel JY, et al. In-vitro diagnostic point-of-care tests in paediatric ambulatory care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(7):e0235605. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235605.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Walters LA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. Developing optimal search strategies for retrieving clinically relevant qualitative studies in EMBASE. Qual Health Res. 2006;16(1):162–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305284027.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Wilczynski NL, Marks S, Haynes RB. Search strategies for identifying qualitative studies in CINAHL. Qual Health Res. 2007;17(5):705–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732306294515.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Wong SS-L, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB, editors. Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically relevant qualitative studies in MEDLINE. MEDINFO 2004; 2004: IOS Press.

32.

McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Parker M, Harper I. The anthropology of public health. J Biosoc Sci. 2006;38(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932005001148.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Colvin CJ. Anthropologies in and of evidence making in global health research and policy. Med Anthropol. 2015;34(2):99–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2014.963196.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Brives C, Le Marcis F, Sanabria E. What’s in a context? Tenses and tensions in evidence-based medicine. Med Anthropol. 2016;35(5):369–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2016.1160089.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Green J. What kind of research does public health need? Crit Public Health. 2014;24(3):249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2014.917813.CrossRef

37.

Rubagumya F, Carson L, Mushonga M, Manirakiza A, Murenzi G, Abdihamid O, et al. An analysis of the African cancer research ecosystem: tackling disparities. BMJ Glob Health. 2023;8(2):e011338. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-011338.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Cross J, Street A. To fail at scale!: minimalism and maximalism in humanitarian entrepreneurship. Soc Anthropol/Anthropologie Sociale. 2022;30(2):101–19. https://doi.org/10.3167/saas.2022.300207.CrossRef

39.

Kelly AH, Lezaun J, Street A. Global health, accelerated: rapid diagnostics and the fragile solidarities of ‘emergency R&D.’ Econ Soc. 2022;51(2):187–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2021.2014730.CrossRef

40.

Engel N. Aligning in the dark: variable and shifting (user-) settings in developing point-of-care diagnostics for tuberculosis and HIV. Soc Stud Sci. 2020;50(1):50–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719900545.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Engel N, Krumeich A. Valuing simplicity: developing a good point of care diagnostic. Front Sociol. 2020;5:37. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2020.00037.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Kameda K, Kelly AH, Lezaun J, Löwy I. Imperfect diagnosis: the truncated legacies of Zika testing. Soc Stud Sci. 2021;51(5):683–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127211035492.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

MacDonald M. Why ethnography matters in global health: the case of the traditional birth attendant. J Glob Health. 2017;7(2). https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020302.

44.

Jones J, Smith J. Ethnography: challenges and opportunities. Evid Based Nurs. 2017;20(4):98–100. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2017-102786.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Pigg SL. On sitting and doing: ethnography as action in global health. Soc Sci Med. 2013;99:127–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.07.018.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Brown TM, Cueto M, Fee E. The World Health Organization and the transition from “international” to “global” public health. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(1):62–72. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.050831.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Birn A-E. The stages of international (global) health: histories of success or successes of history? Glob Public Health. 2009;4(1):50–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441690802017797.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Birn A-E. Gates’s grandest challenge: transcending technology as public health ideology. Lancet. 2005;366(9484):514–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66479-3.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Erikson SL. Secrets from whom? following the money in global health finance. Curr Anthropol. 2015;56(S12):S306–16. https://doi.org/10.1086/683271.CrossRef

50.

McGoey L. Philanthrocapitalism and the separation of powers. Ann Rev Law Soc Sci. 2021;17:391–409. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120220-074323.CrossRef

51.

McGoey L. Philanthrocapitalism and its critics. Poetics. 2012;40(2):185–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2012.02.006.CrossRef

52.

Bhakuni H, Abimbola S. Epistemic injustice in academic global health. Lancet Glob Health. 2021;9(10):e1465–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00301-6.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Abimbola S. The foreign gaze: authorship in academic global health. BMJ Spec J. 2019;4(5):e002068. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002068.

54.

Morton B, Vercueil A, Masekela R, Heinz E, Reimer L, Saleh S, et al. Consensus statement on measures to promote equitable authorship in the publication of research from international partnerships. Anaesthesia. 2022;77(3):264–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15597.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Pingray V, Ortega V, Yaya S, Belizán JM. Authorship in studies conducted in low-and-middle income countries and published by Reproductive Health: advancing equitable global health research collaborations. 2020;17:1-4.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-020-0858-7

56.

Iyer AR. Authorship trends in the lancet global health. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(2):e142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30497-7.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Chaccour J. Authorship trends in the lancet Global Health: only the tip of the iceberg? Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(5):e497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30110-4.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Rohwer A, Young T, Wager E, Garner P. Authorship, plagiarism and conflict of interest: views and practices from low/middle-income country health researchers. BMJ Open. 2017;7(11):e018467. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018467.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Marušić A, Bošnjak L, Jerončić A. A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(9):e23477. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023477.ADSCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Dhingra D, Mishra D. Publication misconduct among medical professionals in India. Indian J Med Ethics. 2014;11(2):104–7. https://doi.org/10.20529/IJME.2014.026.CrossRefPubMed

61.

Okonta P, Rossouw T. Prevalence of scientific misconduct among a group of researchers in Nigeria. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;13(3):149–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00339.x.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Büyüm AM, Kenney C, Koris A, Mkumba L, Raveendran Y. Decolonising global health: if not now, when? BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(8):e003394. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003394.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Abimbola S, Pai M. Will global health survive its decolonisation? Lancet. 2020;396(10263):1627–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32417-X.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Oti SO, Ncayiyana J. Decolonising global health: where are the southern voices? BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(7):e006576. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006576.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Hirsch LA. Is it possible to decolonise global health institutions? Lancet. 2021;397(10270):189–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32763-X.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Kumar M, Atwoli L, Burgess RA, Gaddour N, Huang KY, Kola L, et al. What should equity in global health research look like? Lancet. 2022;400(10347):145–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00888-1.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Franzen SR, Chandler C, Lang T. Health research capacity development in low and middle income countries: reality or rhetoric? a systematic meta-narrative review of the qualitative literature. BMJ Open. 2017;7(1):e012332. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012332.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

68.

Adegnika AA, Amuasi JH, Basinga P, Berhanu D, Medhanyie AA, Okwaraji YB, et al. Embed capacity development within all global health research. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(2):e004692. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004692.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

69.

Franzen SR, Chandler C, Siribaddana S, Atashili J, Angus B, Lang T. Strategies for developing sustainable health research capacity in low and middle-income countries: a prospective, qualitative study investigating the barriers and enablers to locally led clinical trial conduct in Ethiopia, Cameroon and Sri Lanka. BMJ Open. 2017;7(10):e017246. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017246.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

70.

Yusuf ZK, Mademilov M, Mirzalieva G, Orme MW, Bourne CL, Sooronbaev T, et al. Qualitative research capacity building: Reflections from a UK-Kyrgyz Republic global partnership. J Glob Health. 2021;11. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.11.03127.

71.

Asogwa OA, Boateng D, Marzà-Florensa A, Peters S, Levitt N, van Olmen J, et al. Multimorbidity of non-communicable diseases in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12(1):e049133. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

72.

Boutayeb A. The double burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases in developing countries. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2006;100(3):191–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.07.021.CrossRefPubMed

73.

World Health Organization. Ending the neglect to attain the Sustainable Development Goals: a road map for neglected tropical diseases 2021–2030. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020. Report No.: 9240010351. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240010352

74.

Street A, Vernooij E, Rogers MH. Diagnostic waste: whose responsibility? Glob Health. 2022;18(1):30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-022-00823-7.CrossRef

75.

Fanelli S, Salvatore FP, De Pascale G, Faccilongo N. Insights for the future of health system partnerships in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05435-8.CrossRef

76.

Adams V, Burke NJ, Whitmarsh I. Slow research: thoughts for a movement in global health. Med Anthropol. 2014;33(3):179–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2013.858335.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Tremblay S, Castiglione S, Audet L-A, Desmarais M, Horace M, Peláez S. Conducting qualitative research to respond to COVID-19 challenges: reflections for the present and beyond. Int J Qual Methods. 2021;20:16094069211009680. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211009679.CrossRef

Title: Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts
Authors: Janet Perkins
Sarah Nelson
Emma Birley
Emilie Mcswiggan
Marshall Dozier
Anna McCarthy
Nadege Atkins
Eldad Agyei-Manu
Jasmin Rostron
Koichi Kameda
Ann Kelly
Clare Chandler
Alice Street
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10645-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of the BETTER intervention for chronic disease prevention and screening by public health nurses in low income neighbourhoods: views of community residents

Bridging the chasm between patients’ needs and current rehabilitation care: perceptions of adults presenting for primary care in the Eastern Cape

Patterns and determinants of healthcare utilization and medication use before and during the COVID-19 crisis in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and India

Effect of the Japanese medical office system on job satisfaction, loyalty, engagement, and organizational commitment of medical practitioners: a survey of cardiologists in the acute care setting

Factors influencing inequality in government health expenditures within African regional economic communities

Early age at menarche and history of sexually transmitted infections significantly predict cervical cancer screening uptake among women aged 25–49 years: evidence from the 2021 Côte d’Ivoire demographic and health survey