↓ Skip to main content

Enablers and inhibitors of the implementation of the Casalud Model, a Mexican innovative healthcare model for non-communicable disease prevention and control

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Enablers and inhibitors of the implementation of the Casalud Model, a Mexican innovative healthcare model for non-communicable disease prevention and control
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12961-016-0125-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Tapia-Conyer, Rodrigo Saucedo-Martinez, Ricardo Mujica-Rosales, Hector Gallardo-Rincon, Paola Abril Campos-Rivera, Evan Lee, Craig Waugh, Lucia Guajardo, Braulio Torres-Beltran, Ursula Quijano-Gonzalez, Lidia Soni-Gallardo

Abstract

The Mexican healthcare system is under increasing strain due to the rising prevalence of non-communicable diseases (especially type 2 diabetes), mounting costs, and a reactive curative approach focused on treating existing diseases and their complications rather than preventing them. Casalud is a comprehensive primary healthcare model that enables proactive prevention and disease management throughout the continuum of care, using innovative technologies and a patient-centred approach. Data were collected over a 2-year period in eight primary health clinics (PHCs) in two states in central Mexico to identify and assess enablers and inhibitors of the implementation process of Casalud. We used mixed quantitative and qualitative data collection tools: surveys, in-depth interviews, and participant and non-participant observations. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed and coded using Framework Analysis, focusing on defining and describing enablers and inhibitors of the implementation process. We identified seven recurring topics in the analyzed textual data. Four topics were categorized as enablers: political support for the Casalud model, alignment with current healthcare trends, ongoing technical improvements (to ease adoption and support), and capacity building. Three topics were categorized as inhibitors: administrative practices, health clinic human resources, and the lack of a shared vision of the model. Enablers are located at PHCs and across all levels of government, and include political support for, and the technological validity of, the model. The main inhibitor is the persistence of obsolete administrative practices at both state and PHC levels, which puts the administrative feasibility of the model's implementation in jeopardy. Constructing a shared vision around the model could facilitate the implementation of Casalud as well as circumvent administrative inhibitors. In order to overcome PHC-level barriers, it is crucial to have an efficient and straightforward adaptation and updating process for technological tools. One of the key lessons learned from the implementation of the Casalud model is that a degree of uncertainty must be tolerated when quickly scaling up a healthcare intervention. Similar patient-centred technology-based models must remain open to change and be able to quickly adapt to changing circumstances.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 164 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 21%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 44 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 13%
Social Sciences 14 9%
Psychology 7 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 50 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#6,001,605
of 23,798,792 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#702
of 1,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,647
of 367,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#16
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,798,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 367,776 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.