MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136644217 · doi:10.1111/jch.14157

Mapping stages, barriers and facilitators to the implementation of HEARTS in the Americas initiative in 12 countries: A qualitative study

2021· article· en· W3136644217 on OpenAlexaff
Gloria Giraldo, Kristy Joseph, Sonia Y. Angell, Norm R.C. Campbell, Kenneth Connell, Donald J. DiPette, María Cristina Escobar, Yamilé Valdés-González, Marc G. Jaffe, Taraleen Malcolm, Javier Maldonado, Patricio López‐Jaramillo, Michael Hecht Olsen, Pedro Ordúñez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNovo Nordisk Fonden
KeywordsMedicineQualitative researchMEDLINEMedical educationAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Hearts Initiative offers technical packages to reduce the burden of cardiovascular diseases through population-wide and targeted health services interventions. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) has led implementation of the HEARTS in the Americas Initiative since 2016. The authors mapped the developmental stages, barriers, and facilitators to implementation among the 371 primary health care centers in the participating 12 countries. The authors used the qualitative method of document review to examine cumulative country reports, technical meeting notes, and reports to regional stakeholders. Common implementation barriers include segmentation of health systems, overcoming health care professionals' scope of practice legal restrictions, and lack of health information systems limiting operational evaluation and quality improvement mechanisms. Main implementation facilitators include political support from ministries of health and leading scientific societies, PAHO's role as a regional catalyst to implementation, stakeholder endorsement demonstrated by incorporating HEARTS into official documents, and having a health system oriented to primary health care. Key lessons include the need for political commitment and cultivating on-the-ground leadership to initiate a shift in hypertension care delivery, accompanied by specific progress in the development of standardized treatment protocols and a set of high-quality medicines. By systematizing an implementation strategy to ease integration of interventions into delivery processes, the program strengthened technical leadership and ensured sustainability. These study findings will aid the regional approach by providing a staged planning model that incorporates lessons learned. A systematic approach to implementation will enhance equity, efficiency, scale-up, and sustainability, and ultimately improve population hypertension control.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.528
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.029 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207