↓ Skip to main content

Strategic partnering to improve community health worker programming and performance: features of a community-health system integrated approach

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
290 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
Strategic partnering to improve community health worker programming and performance: features of a community-health system integrated approach
Published in
Human Resources for Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0041-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph F. Naimoli, Henry B. Perry, John W. Townsend, Diana E. Frymus, James A. McCaffery

Abstract

There is robust evidence that community health workers (CHWs) in low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries can improve their clients' health and well-being. The evidence on proven strategies to enhance and sustain CHW performance at scale, however, is limited. Nevertheless, CHW stakeholders need guidance and new ideas, which can emerge from the recognition that CHWs function at the intersection of two dynamic, overlapping systems - the formal health system and the community. Although each typically supports CHWs, their support is not necessarily strategic, collaborative or coordinated. We explore a strategic community health system partnership as one approach to improving CHW programming and performance in countries with or intending to mount large-scale CHW programmes. To identify the components of the approach, we drew on a year-long evidence synthesis exercise on CHW performance, synthesis records, author consultations, documentation on large-scale CHW programmes published after the synthesis and other relevant literature. We also established inclusion and exclusion criteria for the components we considered. We examined as well the challenges and opportunities associated with implementing each component. We identified a minimum package of four strategies that provide opportunities for increased cooperation between communities and health systems and address traditional weaknesses in large-scale CHW programmes, and for which implementation is feasible at sub-national levels over large geographic areas and among vulnerable populations in the greatest need of care. We postulate that the CHW performance benefits resulting from the simultaneous implementation of all four strategies could outweigh those that either the health system or community could produce independently. The strategies are (1) joint ownership and design of CHW programmes, (2) collaborative supervision and constructive feedback, (3) a balanced package of incentives, and (4) a practical monitoring system incorporating data from communities and the health system. We believe that strategic partnership between communities and health systems on a minimum package of simultaneously implemented strategies offers the potential for accelerating progress in improving CHW performance at scale. Comparative, retrospective and prospective research can confirm the potential of these strategies. More experience and evidence on strategic partnership can contribute to our understanding of how to achieve sustainable progress in health with equity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 284 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 65 22%
Researcher 43 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 6%
Student > Bachelor 17 6%
Other 59 20%
Unknown 54 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 17%
Social Sciences 46 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 17 6%
Unspecified 9 3%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 67 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 24 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,811,067
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#335
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,815
of 276,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#10
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 276,788 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 67% of its contemporaries.