Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25820367›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2016

Exploring perceptions of community health policy in Kenya and identifying implications for policy change.

Rosalind McCollum, Lilian Otiso, Maryline Mireku, Sally Theobald, Korrie de Koning, Salim Hussein, Miriam Taegtmeyer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Rosalind McCollumDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, UK, r.mccollum@liverpool.ac.uk.
Lilian OtisoResearch and Strategic Information Department LVCT Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Maryline MirekuResearch and Strategic Information Department LVCT Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Sally TheobaldDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, UK.
Korrie de KoningKIT Health, Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and.
Salim HusseinCommunity Health and Development Unit, Ministry of Health, Kenya.
Miriam TaegtmeyerDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, UK.
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBMinistry of Health · KERoyal Tropical Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal interest and investment in close-to-community health services is increasing. Kenya is currently revising its community health strategy (CHS) alongside political devolution, which will result in revisioning of responsibility for local services. This article aims to explore drivers of policy change from key informant perspectives and to study perceptions of current community health services from community and sub-county levels, including perceptions of what is and what is not working well. It highlights implications for managing policy change.

methodsWe conducted 40 in-depth interviews and 10 focus group discussions with a range of participants to capture plural perspectives, including those who will influence or be influenced by CHS policy change in Kenya (policymakers, sub-county health management teams, facility managers, community health extension worker (CHEW), community health workers (CHWs), clients and community members) in two purposively selected counties: Nairobi and Kitui. Qualitative data were digitally recorded, transcribed, translated and coded before framework analysis.

resultsThere is widespread community appreciation for the existing strategy. High attrition, lack of accountability for voluntary CHWs and lack of funds to pay CHW salaries, combined with high CHEW workload were seen as main drivers for strategy change. Areas for change identified include: lack of clear supervisory structure including provision of adequate travel resources, current uneven coverage and equity of community health services, limited community knowledge about the strategy revision and demand for home-based HIV testing and counselling.

conclusionThis in-depth analysis which captures multiple perspectives results in robust recommendations for strategy revision informed by the Five Wonders of Change Framework. These recommendations point towards a more people-centred health system for improved equity and effectiveness and indicate priority areas for action if success of policy change through the roll-out of the revised strategy is to be realized.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PolicyPolicy MakingCommunity Health ServicesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicKenyaMaleQualitative Researchclose to community providerCommunity health extension workercommunity health workerKenyapolicy

Identifiers

PMID25820367
PMCPMC4724165
OpenAlexW2048879774

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.