Using PARIHS framework to design a community-based COVID-19 intervention in rural Ghana

  1. Shadrack Frimpong
  2. Moro Seidu
  3. Sam Kris Hilton

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

This study utilized the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework to guide the design of the evidence-based practice – COVID Preparedness & Outbreak Prevention Plan (CoCoPOPP) for rural communities in Ghana. Through a participatory academic-community team discussion, interactive dissemination, review of evidence about community-based interventions during Ebola, HIV/AIDS, and Influenza outbreaks via snowball sampling, continuous discourse within the design team, feedback from other local stakeholders and national experts, the evidence-based intervention was developed consistent with the PARIHS framework. By applying the three core elements of the PARIHS framework (that is, evidence, context and facilitation), the study developed orientation, logistic needs and planning as well as social mobilization. The components also included participants recruitment and training, communication, research and M&E plan, execution and technical assistance and facilitation with three overall aims: (1) meet a pressing health need during the COVID-19 pandemic in local underserved settings, (2) ensure that the strategy is informed by high-quality evidence from similar interventions in past outbreaks and (3) evaluate and learn from research on interventions to garner data for organizational use and to share insights on pandemic management and control with the Ghanaian government, wider global health and education community. Hence, CoCoPOPP can be implemented across other rural communities in Ghana and beyond, particularly in other Sub-Saharan African countries with similar cultural settings.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.30.21254353: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.30.21254353v1 on medRxiv