↓ Skip to main content

Forming a joint dialogue among faith healers, traditional healers and formal health workers in mental health in a Kenyan setting: towards common grounds

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
211 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
Forming a joint dialogue among faith healers, traditional healers and formal health workers in mental health in a Kenyan setting: towards common grounds
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0075-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine W. Musyimi, Victoria N. Mutiso, Erick S. Nandoya, David M. Ndetei

Abstract

Qualitative evidence on dialogue formation and collaboration is very scanty in Kenya. This study thus aimed at the formation of dialogue and establishment of collaboration among the informal (faith and traditional healers) and formal health workers (clinicians) in enhancing community-based mental health in rural Kenya. Qualitative approach was used to identify barriers and solutions for dialogue formation by conducting nine Focus Group Discussions each consisting of 8-10 participants. Information on age, gender and role in health care setting as well as practitioners' (henceforth used to mean informal (faith and traditional healers) and formal health workers) perceptions on dialogue was collected to evaluate dialogue formation. Qualitative and quantitative data analysis was performed using thematic content analysis and Statistical Package Social Sciences (SPSS) software respectively. We identified four dominant themes such as; (i) basic understanding about mental illnesses, (ii) interaction and treatment skills of the respondents to mentally ill persons, (iii) referral gaps and mistrust among the practitioners and (iv) dialogue formation among the practitioners. Although participants were conversant with the definition of mental illness and had interacted with a mentally ill person in their routine practice, they had basic information on the causes and types of mental illness. Traditional and faith healers felt demeaned by the clinicians who disregarded their mode of treatment stereotyping them as "dirty". After various discussions, majority of practitioners showed interest in collaborating with each other and stated that they had joined the dialogue in order interact with people committed to improving the lives of patients. Dialogue formation between the formal and the informal health workers is crucial in establishing trust and respect between both practitioners and in improving mental health care in Kenya. This approach could be scaled up among all the registered traditional and faith healers in Kenya.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 211 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 16%
Researcher 26 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 41 19%
Unknown 59 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 13%
Social Sciences 19 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 74 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 May 2019.
All research outputs
#15,484,498
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#516
of 737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,068
of 394,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#13
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 737 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 394,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.