↓ Skip to main content

Demand-side financing for maternal and newborn health: what do we know about factors that affect implementation of cash transfers and voucher programmes?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
273 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
Demand-side financing for maternal and newborn health: what do we know about factors that affect implementation of cash transfers and voucher programmes?
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12884-017-1445-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin M. Hunter, Susan F. Murray

Abstract

Demand-side financing (DSF) interventions, including cash transfers and vouchers, have been introduced to promote maternal and newborn health in a range of low- and middle-income countries. These interventions vary in design but have typically been used to increase health service utilisation by offsetting some financial costs for users, or increasing household income and incentivising 'healthy behaviours'. This article documents experiences and implementation factors associated with use of DSF in maternal and newborn health. A secondary analysis (using an adapted Supporting the Use of Research Evidence framework - SURE) was performed on studies that had previously been identified in a systematic review of evidence on DSF interventions in maternal and newborn health. The article draws on findings from 49 quantitative and 49 qualitative studies. The studies give insights on difficulties with exclusion of migrants, young and multiparous women, with demands for informal fees at facilities, and with challenges maintaining quality of care under increasing demand. Schemes experienced difficulties if communities faced long distances to reach participating facilities and poor access to transport, and where there was inadequate health infrastructure and human resources, shortages of medicines and problems with corruption. Studies that documented improved care-seeking indicated the importance of adequate programme scope (in terms of programme eligibility, size and timing of payments and voucher entitlements) to address the issue of concern, concurrent investments in supply-side capacity to sustain and/or improve quality of care, and awareness generation using community-based workers, leaders and women's groups. Evaluations spanning more than 15 years of implementation of DSF programmes reveal a complex picture of experiences that reflect the importance of financial and other social, geographical and health systems factors as barriers to accessing care. Careful design of DSF programmes as part of broader maternal and newborn health initiatives would need to take into account these barriers, the behaviours of staff and the quality of care in health facilities. Research is still needed on the policy context for DSF schemes in order to understand how they become sustainable and where they fit, or do not fit, with plans to achieve equitable universal health coverage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 273 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 52 19%
Student > Master 44 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 46 17%
Unknown 71 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 22%
Social Sciences 37 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 84 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 23 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,877,447
of 23,917,076 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,025
of 4,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,391
of 319,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#23
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,917,076 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 319,226 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.