↓ Skip to main content

How does context influence performance of community health workers in low- and middle-income countries? Evidence from the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
53 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
586 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
How does context influence performance of community health workers in low- and middle-income countries? Evidence from the literature
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12961-015-0001-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maryse C Kok, Sumit S Kane, Olivia Tulloch, Hermen Ormel, Sally Theobald, Marjolein Dieleman, Miriam Taegtmeyer, Jacqueline EW Broerse, Korrie AM de Koning

Abstract

Community health workers (CHWs) are increasingly recognized as an integral component of the health workforce needed to achieve public health goals in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Many factors intersect to influence CHW performance. A systematic review with a narrative analysis was conducted to identify contextual factors influencing performance of CHWs. We searched six databases for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies that included CHWs working in promotional, preventive or curative primary health care services in LMICs. We differentiated CHW performance outcome measures at two levels: CHW level and end-user level. Ninety-four studies met the inclusion criteria and were double read to extract data relevant to the context of CHW programmes. Thematic coding was conducted and evidence on five main categories of contextual factors influencing CHW performance was synthesized. Few studies had the influence of contextual factors on CHW performance as their primary research focus. Contextual factors related to community (most prominently), economy, environment, and health system policy and practice were found to influence CHW performance. Socio-cultural factors (including gender norms and values and disease related stigma), safety and security and education and knowledge level of the target group were community factors that influenced CHW performance. Existence of a CHW policy, human resource policy legislation related to CHWs and political commitment were found to be influencing factors within the health system policy context. Health system practice factors included health service functionality, human resources provisions, level of decision-making, costs of health services, and the governance and coordination structure. All contextual factors can interact to shape CHW performance and affect the performance of CHW interventions or programmes. Research on CHW programmes often does not capture or explicitly discuss the context in which CHW interventions take place. This synthesis situates and discusses the influence of context on CHW and programme performance. Future health policy and systems research should better address the complexity of contextual influences on programmes. This insight can help policy makers and programme managers to develop CHW interventions that adequately address and respond to context to optimise performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 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 586 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Rwanda 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 575 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 105 18%
Researcher 93 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 65 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 6%
Student > Bachelor 35 6%
Other 110 19%
Unknown 143 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 131 22%
Social Sciences 88 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 79 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 17 3%
Unspecified 17 3%
Other 89 15%
Unknown 165 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 20 June 2023.
All research outputs
#790,847
of 25,081,505 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#54
of 1,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,784
of 264,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,081,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 264,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.