↓ Skip to main content

“They do not see us as one of them”: a qualitative exploration of mentor mothers’ working relationships with healthcare workers in rural North-Central Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 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
“They do not see us as one of them”: a qualitative exploration of mentor mothers’ working relationships with healthcare workers in rural North-Central Nigeria
Published in
Human Resources for Health, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12960-018-0313-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nadia A. Sam-Agudu, Angela Odiachi, Miriam J. Bathnna, Chinazom N. Ekwueme, Gift Nwanne, Emilia N. Iwu, Llewellyn J. Cornelius

Abstract

In HIV programs, mentor mothers (MMs) are women living with HIV who provide peer support for other women to navigate HIV care, especially in the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (PMTCT). Nigeria has significant PMTCT program gaps, and in this resource-constrained setting, lay health workers such as MMs serve as task shifting resources for formal healthcare workers and facility-community liaisons for their clients. However, challenging work conditions including tenuous working relationships with healthcare workers can reduce MMs' impact on PMTCT outcomes. This study explores the experiences and opinions of MMs with respect to their work conditions and relationships with healthcare workers. This study was nested in the prospective two-arm Mother Mentor (MoMent) study, which evaluated structured peer support in PMTCT. Thirty-six out of the 38 MMs who were ever engaged in the MoMent study were interviewed in seven focus group discussions, which focused on MM workload and stipends, scope of work, and relationships with healthcare workers. English and English-translated Hausa-language transcripts were manually analyzed by theme and content in a grounded theory approach. Both intervention and control-arm MMs reported positive and negative relationships with healthcare workers, modulated by individual healthcare worker and structural factors. Issues with facility-level scope of work, workplace hierarchy, exclusivism and stigma/discrimination from healthcare workers were discussed. MMs identified clarification, formalization, and health system integration of their roles and services as potential mitigations to tenuous relationships with healthcare workers and challenging working conditions. MMs function in multiple roles, as task shifting resources, lay community health workers, and peer counselors. MMs need a more formalized, well-defined niche that is fully integrated into the health system and is responsive to their needs. Additionally, the definition and formalization of MM roles have to take healthcare worker orientation, sensitization, and acceptability into consideration. Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT01936753 , registered September 3, 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 184 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 14%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Master 19 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Other 24 13%
Unknown 73 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 10%
Social Sciences 13 7%
Psychology 9 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 88 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,000,448
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#722
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,670
of 347,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#23
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 347,461 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.