↓ Skip to main content

Subnational variation for care at birth in Tanzania: is this explained by place, people, money or drugs?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
186 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Subnational variation for care at birth in Tanzania: is this explained by place, people, money or drugs?
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3404-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corinne E. Armstrong, Melisa Martínez-Álvarez, Neha S. Singh, Theopista John, Hoviyeh Afnan-Holmes, Chris Grundy, Corrine W. Ruktanochai, Josephine Borghi, Moke Magoma, Georgina Msemo, Zoe Matthews, Gemini Mtei, Joy E. Lawn

Abstract

Tanzania achieved the Millennium Development Goal for child survival, yet made insufficient progress for maternal and neonatal survival and stillbirths, due to low coverage and quality of services for care at birth, with rural women left behind. Our study aimed to evaluate Tanzania's subnational (regional-level) variations for rural care at birth outcomes, i.e., rural women giving birth in a facility and by Caesarean section (C-section), and associations with health systems inputs (financing, health workforce, facilities, and commodities), outputs (readiness and quality of care) and context (education and GDP). We undertook correlation analyses of subnational-level associations between health system inputs, outputs, context, and rural care at birth outcomes; and constructed implementation readiness barometers using benchmarks for each health system input indicator. We used geographical information system (GIS) mapping to visualise subnational variations in care at birth for rural women, with a focus on service availability and readiness, and collected qualitative data to investigate financial flows from national to council level to understand variation in financing inputs. We found wide subnational variation for rural care at birth outcomes, health systems inputs, and contextual indicators. There was a positive association between rural women giving birth in a facility and by C-section; maternal education; workforce and facility density; and quality of care. There was a negative association between these outcomes and proportion of all births to rural women, total fertility rate, and availability of essential commodities at facilities. Per capita recurrent expenditure was positively associated with facility births (correlation coefficient = 0.43; p = 0.05) but not with C-section. Qualitative results showed that the health financing system is complex and insufficient for providing care at birth services. Bottlenecks for care at birth included low density of health workers, poor availability of essential commodities, and low health financing in Lake and Western Zones. No region meets the benchmarks for the four health systems building blocks including health finance, health workforce, health facilities, and commodities. Strategies for addressing health system inequities, including overall increases in health expenditure, are needed in rural populations and areas of highest unmet need for family planning to improve coverage of care at birth for rural women in Tanzania.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 182 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Other 29 16%
Unknown 46 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 20%
Social Sciences 27 15%
Psychology 6 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Other 27 15%
Unknown 47 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2018.
All research outputs
#2,243,263
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,554
of 14,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,570
of 322,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#74
of 353 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,308 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 353 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.