Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28865466›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2017

The impact of a supportive supervision intervention on health workers in Niassa, Mozambique: a cluster-controlled trial.

Tavares Madede, Mohsin Sidat, Eilish McAuliffe, Sergio Rogues Patricio, Ogenna Uduma, Marie Galligan, Susan Bradley, Isabel Cambe

Open access · goldAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Tavares MadedeDepartment of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Eduardo Mondlane University, 702 Salvador Allende Ave., PO Box 257, Maputo, Mozambique.
Mohsin SidatDepartment of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Eduardo Mondlane University, 702 Salvador Allende Ave., PO Box 257, Maputo, Mozambique.
Eilish McAuliffeSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. eilish.mcauliffe@ucd.ie.ORCID 0000-0002-9714-5040
Sergio Rogues PatricioDepartment of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Eduardo Mondlane University, 702 Salvador Allende Ave., PO Box 257, Maputo, Mozambique.
Ogenna UdumaCentre for Global Health, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Marie GalliganSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Susan BradleySchool of Health Sciences, City University London, 1 Myddelton Street, London, EC1R 1UW, United Kingdom.
Isabel CambeNational Health Institute, Maputo, Mozambique.
Eduardo Mondlane University · MZUniversity College Dublin · IECity, University of London · GBTrinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegular supportive supervision is critical to retaining and motivating staff in resource-constrained settings. Previous studies have shown the particular contribution that supportive supervision can make to improving job satisfaction amongst over-stretched health workers in such settings.

methodsThe Support, Train and Empower Managers (STEM) study designed and implemented a supportive supervision intervention and measured its' impact on health workers using a controlled trial design with a three-arm pre- and post-study in Niassa Province in Mozambique. Post-intervention interviews with a small sample of health workers were also conducted.

resultsThe quantitative measurements of job satisfaction, emotional exhaustion and work engagement showed no statistically significant differences between end-line and baseline. The qualitative data collected from health workers post the intervention showed many positive impacts on health workers not captured by this quantitative survey.

conclusionsHealth workers perceived an improvement in their performance and attributed this to the supportive supervision they had received from their supervisors following the intervention. Reports of increased motivation were also common. An unexpected, yet important consequence of the intervention, which participants directly attributed to the supervision intervention, was the increase in participation and voice amongst health workers in intervention facilities.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelClinical CompetenceCommunity Health WorkersFemaleHumansMaleMozambiquePersonnel ManagementProfessional AutonomyQuality ImprovementTotal Quality ManagementWork PerformanceBurnoutJob satisfactionMotivationParticipationRetentionSupportive supervisionWork engagement

Identifiers

PMID28865466
PMCPMC5581457
OpenAlexW2751626265

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.