↓ Skip to main content

Social accountability for maternal health services in Muanda and Bolenge Health Zones, Democratic Republic of Congo: a situation analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2015
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
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 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
Social accountability for maternal health services in Muanda and Bolenge Health Zones, Democratic Republic of Congo: a situation analysis
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1176-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric M. Mafuta, Marjolein A. Dieleman, Lisanne M. Hogema, Paul N. Khomba, François M. Zioko, Patrick K. Kayembe, Tjard de Cock Buning, Thérèse N. M. Mambu

Abstract

The Democratic Republic of the Congo is one of the countries in Sub-Saharan Africa with the highest maternal mortality ratio estimated at 846 deaths per 100,000 live births. Innovative strategies such as social accountability are needed to improve both health service delivery and utilization. Indeed, social accountability is a form of citizen engagement defined as the 'extent and capability of citizens to hold politicians, policy makers and providers accountable and make them responsive to their needs.' This study explores existing social accountability mechanisms through which women's concerns are expressed and responded to by health providers in local settings. An exploratory study was conducted in two health zones with purposively sampled respondents including twenty-five women, five men, five health providers, two health zone officers and eleven community stakeholders. Data on women's voice and oversight and health providers' responsiveness were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. In the two health zones, women rarely voiced their concerns and expectations about health services. This reluctance was due to: the absence of procedures to express them, to the lack of knowledge thereof, fear of reprisals, of being misunderstood as well as factors such as age-related power, ethnicity backgrounds, and women's status. The means most often mentioned by women for expressing their concerns were as individuals rather than as a collective. They did not use them instead; instead they looked to intermediaries, mostly, trusted health providers, community health workers and local leaders. Their perceptions of health providers' responsiveness varied. For women, there were no mechanisms for oversight in place. Individual discontent with malpractice was not shown to health providers. In contrast, health providers mentioned community health workers, health committee, and community based organizations as formal oversight mechanisms. All respondents recognized the lack of coalition around maternal health despite the many local associations and groups. Social accountability is relatively inexistent in the maternal health services in the two health zones. For social accountability to be promoted, efforts need to be made to create its mechanisms and to open the local context settings to dialogue, which appears structurally absent.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 1 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Unknown 209 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 15%
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 6%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 45 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 19%
Social Sciences 39 18%
Psychology 6 3%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 19 9%
Unknown 56 26%
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 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,350,522
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,563
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,287
of 386,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#67
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 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 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 386,225 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 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.