↓ Skip to main content

Measuring health systems strength and its impact: experiences from the African Health Initiative

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
232 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
Measuring health systems strength and its impact: experiences from the African Health Initiative
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2658-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenneth Sherr, Quinhas Fernandes, Almamy M. Kanté, Ayaga Bawah, Jeanine Condo, Wilbroad Mutale, the AHI PHIT Partnership Collaborative

Abstract

Health systems are essential platforms for accessible, quality health services, and population health improvements. Global health initiatives have dramatically increased health resources; however, funding to strengthen health systems has not increased commensurately, partially due to concerns about health system complexity and evidence gaps demonstrating health outcome improvements. In 2009, the African Health Initiative of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation began supporting Population Health Implementation and Training Partnership projects in five sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia) to catalyze significant advances in strengthening health systems. This manuscript reflects on the experience of establishing an evaluation framework to measure health systems strength, and associate measures with health outcomes, as part of this Initiative. Using the World Health Organization's health systems building block framework, the Partnerships present novel approaches to measure health systems building blocks and summarize data across and within building blocks to facilitate analytic procedures. Three Partnerships developed summary measures spanning the building blocks using principal component analysis (Ghana and Tanzania) or the balanced scorecard (Zambia). Other Partnerships developed summary measures to simplify multiple indicators within individual building blocks, including health information systems (Mozambique), and service delivery (Rwanda). At the end of the project intervention period, one to two key informants from each Partnership's leadership team were asked to list - in rank order - the importance of the six building blocks in relation to their intervention. Though there were differences across Partnerships, service delivery and information systems were reported to be the most common focus of interventions, followed by health workforce and leadership and governance. Medical products, vaccines and technologies, and health financing, were the building blocks reported to be of lower focus. The African Health Initiative experience furthers the science of evaluation for health systems strengthening, highlighting areas for further methodological development - including the development of valid, feasible measures sensitive to interventions in multiple contexts (particularly in leadership and governance) and describing interactions across building blocks; in developing summary statistics to facilitate testing intervention effects on health systems and associations with health status; and designing appropriate analytic models for complex, multi-level open health systems.

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 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 232 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 18%
Researcher 33 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 62 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 16%
Social Sciences 30 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 3%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 65 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 February 2018.
All research outputs
#13,223,874
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,444
of 7,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,583
of 440,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#104
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 440,666 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.