↓ Skip to main content

The midwives service scheme: a qualitative comparison of contextual determinants of the performance of two states in central Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in Global Health Research and Policy, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
The midwives service scheme: a qualitative comparison of contextual determinants of the performance of two states in central Nigeria
Published in
Global Health Research and Policy, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41256-016-0017-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnold I. Okpani, Seye Abimbola

Abstract

The federal government of Nigeria started the Midwives Service Scheme in 2009 to address the scarcity of skilled health workers in rural communities by temporarily redistributing midwives from urban to rural communities. The scheme was designed as a collaboration among federal, state and local governments. Six years on, this study examines the contextual factors that account for the differences in performance of the scheme in Benue and Kogi, two contiguous states in central Nigeria. We obtained qualitative data through 14 in-depth interviews and 2 focus group discussions: 14 government officials at the federal, state and local government levels were interviewed to explore their perceptions on the design, implementation and sustainability of the Midwives Service Scheme. In addition, mothers in rural communities participated in 2 focus group discussions (one in each state) to elicit their views on Midwives Service Scheme services. The qualitative data were analysed for themes. The inability of the federal government to substantially influence the health care agenda of sub-national governments was a significant impediment to the achievement of the objectives of the Midwives Service Scheme. Participants identified differences in government prioritisation of primary health care between Benue and Kogi as relevant to maternal and child health outcomes in those states: Kogi was far more supportive of the Midwives Service Scheme and primary health care more broadly. High user fees in Benue was a significant barrier to the uptake of available maternal and child health services. Differential levels of political support and prioritisation, alongside financial barriers, contribute substantially to the uptake of maternal and child health services. For collaborative health sector strategies to gain sufficient traction, where federating units determine their health care priorities, they must be accompanied by strong and enforceable commitment by sub-national governments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 67 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 22%
Student > Postgraduate 8 12%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 25 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 25 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,924,429
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Global Health Research and Policy
#108
of 200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,758
of 313,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health Research and Policy
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 313,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.