Browsing by Author "Dizon, Janine"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
- ItemContextualised strategies to increase childhood and adolescent vaccination coverage in South Africa : a mixed-methods study(BMJ Publishing, 2020-06-04) Wiysonge, Charles Shey; Mahasha, Phetole Walter; Ndwandwe, Duduzile Edith; Ngcobo, Ntombenhle; Grimmer, Karen; Dizon, Janine; Burnett, Rosemary J.; Cooper, SaraIntroduction Despite the unparalleled success of immunisation in the control of vaccine preventable diseases, immunisation coverage in South Africa remains suboptimal. While many evidence-based interventions have successfully improved vaccination coverage in other countries, they are not necessarily appropriate to the immunisation needs, barriers and facilitators of South Africa. The aim of this research is to investigate barriers and facilitators to optimal vaccination uptake, and develop contextualised strategies and implementation plans to increase childhood and adolescent vaccination coverage in South Africa. Methods The study will employ a mixed-methods research design. It will be conducted over three iterative phases and use the Adopt, Contextualise or Adapt (ACA) model as an overarching conceptual framework. Phase 1 will identify, and develop a sampling frame of, immunisation stakeholders involved in the design, planning and implementation of childhood and human papillomavirus immunisation programmes in South Africa. Phase 2 will identify the main barriers and facilitators to, and solutions for, increasing vaccination coverage. This phase will comprise exploratory qualitative research with stakeholders and a review of existing systematic reviews on interventions for improving vaccination coverage. Using the findings from Phase 2 and the ACA model, Phase 3 will develop a set of proposed interventions and implementation action plans for improving immunisation coverage in South Africa. These plans will be discussed, revised and finalised through a series of participatory stakeholder workshops and an online questionnaire, conducted as part of Phase 3.
- ItemSouth African clinical practice guidelines quality measured with complex and rapid appraisal instruments(BioMed Central, 2016-04-27) Grimmer, Karen; Machingaidze, Shingai; Dizon, Janine; Kredo, Tamara; Louw, Quinette; Young, TarynENGLISH SUMMARY : Background: Critically appraising the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is an essential element of evidence implementation. Critical appraisal considers the quality of CPG construction and reporting processes, and the credibility of the body of evidence underpinning ecommendations. To date, the focus on CPG critical appraisal has come from researchers and evaluators, using complex appraisal instruments. Rapid critical appraisal is a relatively new approach for CPGs, which targets busy end-users such as service managers and clinicians. This paper compares the findings of two critical appraisal instruments: a rapid instrument (iCAHE) and a complex instrument (AGREE II). They were applied independently to 16 purposively-sampled, heterogeneous South African CPGs, written for eleven primary health care conditions/health areas. Overall scores, and scores in the two instruments’ common domains Scope and Purpose, Stakeholder involvement, Underlying evidence/Rigour of Development, Clarity), were compared using Pearson r correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients. CPGs with differences of 10 % or greater between scores were identified and reasons sought for such differences. The time taken to apply the instruments was recorded. Results: Both instruments identified the generally poor quality of the included CPGs, particularly in Rigour of Development. Correlation and agreement between instrument scores was moderate, and there were no overall significant score differences. Large differences in scores for some CPGs could be explained by differences in instrument construction and focus, and CPG construction. The iCAHE instrument was demonstrably quicker to use than the AGREE II instrument. Conclusions: Either instrument could be used with confidence to assess the quality of CPGs. The choice of appraisal instrument depends on the needs and time of end-users. Having an alternative (rapid) critical appraisal tool will potentially encourage busy end-users to identify and use good quality CPGs to inform practice decisions.