↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the local context and its possible influences on shaping, implementing and running social accountability initiatives for maternal health services in rural Democratic Republic of the…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
Understanding the local context and its possible influences on shaping, implementing and running social accountability initiatives for maternal health services in rural Democratic Republic of the Congo: a contextual factor analysis
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1895-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric M. Mafuta, Lisanne Hogema, Thérèse N. M. Mambu, Pontien B. Kiyimbi, Berthys P. Indebe, Patrick K. Kayembe, Tjard De Cock Buning, Marjolein A. Dieleman

Abstract

Social accountability has to be configured according to the context in which it operates. This paper aimed to identify local contextual factors in two health zones in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and discuss their possible influences on shaping, implementing and running social accountability initiatives. Data on local socio-cultural characteristics, the governance context, and socio-economic conditions related to social accountability enabling factors were collected in the two health zones using semi-structured interviews and document reviews, and were analyzed using thematic analysis. The contexts of the two health zones were similar and characterized by the existence of several community groups, similarly structured and using similar decision-making processes. They were not involved in the health sector's activities and had no link with the health committee, even though they acknowledged its existence. They were not networked as they focused on their own activities and did not have enough capacity in terms of social mobilization or exerting pressure on public authorities or providers. Women were not perceived as marginalized as they often occupied other positions in the community besides carrying out domestic tasks and participated in community groups. However, they were still subject to the local male dominance culture, which restrains their involvement in decision-making, as they tend to be less educated, unemployed and suffer from a lack of resources or specific skills. The socio-economic context is characterized by subsistence activities and a low employment rate, which limits the community members' incomes and increases their dependence on external support. The governance context was characterized by imperfect implementation of political decentralization. Community groups advocating community rights are identified as "political" and are not welcomed. The community groups seemed not to be interested in the health center's information and had no access to media as it is non-existent. The local contexts in the two health zones seemed not to be supportive of the operation of social accountability initiatives. However, they offer starting points for social accountability initiatives if better use is made of existing contextual factors, for instance by making community groups work together and improving their capacities in terms of knowledge and information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 99 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 30 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 37 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,796,561
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,823
of 7,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,148
of 313,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#74
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 313,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.