↓ Skip to main content

Improving data quality across 3 sub-Saharan African countries using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): results from the African Health Initiative

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
315 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
Improving data quality across 3 sub-Saharan African countries using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): results from the African Health Initiative
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2660-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Gimbel, Moses Mwanza, Marie Paul Nisingizwe, Cathy Michel, Lisa Hirschhorn, the AHI PHIT Partnership Collaborative

Abstract

High-quality data are critical to inform, monitor and manage health programs. Over the seven-year African Health Initiative of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, three of the five Population Health Implementation and Training (PHIT) partnership projects in Mozambique, Rwanda, and Zambia introduced strategies to improve the quality and evaluation of routinely-collected data at the primary health care level, and stimulate its use in evidence-based decision-making. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as a guide, this paper: 1) describes and categorizes data quality assessment and improvement activities of the projects, and 2) identifies core intervention components and implementation strategy adaptations introduced to improve data quality in each setting. The CFIR was adapted through a qualitative theme reduction process involving discussions with key informants from each project, who identified two domains and ten constructs most relevant to the study aim of describing and comparing each country's data quality assessment approach and implementation process. Data were collected on each project's data quality improvement strategies, activities implemented, and results via a semi-structured questionnaire with closed and open-ended items administered to health management information systems leads in each country, with complementary data abstraction from project reports. Across the three projects, intervention components that aligned with user priorities and government systems were perceived to be relatively advantageous, and more readily adapted and adopted. Activities that both assessed and improved data quality (including data quality assessments, mentorship and supportive supervision, establishment and/or strengthening of electronic medical record systems), received higher ranking scores from respondents. Our findings suggest that, at a minimum, successful data quality improvement efforts should include routine audits linked to ongoing, on-the-job mentoring at the point of service. This pairing of interventions engages health workers in data collection, cleaning, and analysis of real-world data, and thus provides important skills building with on-site mentoring. The effect of these core components is strengthened by performance review meetings that unify multiple health system levels (provincial, district, facility, and community) to assess data quality, highlight areas of weakness, and plan improvements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 315 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 19%
Researcher 42 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 9%
Student > Bachelor 26 8%
Other 22 7%
Other 55 17%
Unknown 82 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 56 18%
Social Sciences 27 9%
Computer Science 17 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 3%
Other 46 15%
Unknown 98 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 February 2024.
All research outputs
#6,606,658
of 25,481,734 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,991
of 8,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,972
of 448,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#67
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,481,734 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 448,277 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.