Community acceptability of cardiovascular risk screening in faith centres in the Kassena-Nankana districts of Northern Ghana: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study explored the community acceptability of a faith-based screening programme for cardiometabolic risk factors, specifically type 2 diabetes and hypertension, among faith congregation members in Northern Ghana. METHODS: The research team conducted 18 in-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews and 10 focus groups, with a total of 123 participants, between October 2022 and February 2023 to discuss the acceptability of a proposed faith-based screening programme. Participants included faith leaders, congregation member nurses, and other congregation members from six religious organizations in the Kassena-Nankana East Municipality and West District in the Upper East Region of Northern Ghana. The study population ranged from 18 to 85 years old. The analytical process involved a combined inductive and deductive thematic analysis to identify key themes related to community acceptability of cardiovascular risk screening. RESULTS: Participants' comments on the acceptability of the proposed screening programme centred on four key themes: (1) Awareness and perception of type 2 diabetes and hypertension, (2) Perceptions of current screening services, (3) Challenges in Implementation, (4) Implementation strategies (what might work). All participants expressed a willingness to participate in the programme, though its success was deemed contingent on the provision of free screening services, access to treatment, and addressing certain challenges: stigma surrounding diagnosis, and concerns about treatment affordability. Solutions included support from congregation health professionals in delivering screenings, access to diabetes treatment, and assurances of maintaining patient confidentiality. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight community acceptability and willingness to participate in the screening programme, contingent upon addressing key challenges identified through both focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. These challenges included concerns about treatment affordability, the need for comprehensive community education, maintaining confidentiality, and ensuring screening services are convenient and time efficient. Participants emphasized the importance of leveraging congregation-based health professionals, providing pre- and post-screening counselling, and offering follow-up support for those diagnosed. These insights demonstrate that while faith-based centres present a promising platform for health interventions. The findings highlight the need for multi-sectoral collaboration to ensure equitable access, referral, and follow-up across health and community systems, addressing these barriers is crucial for successful implementation and sustainability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.060 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".