Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31046748›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

"We come as friends": approaches to social accountability by health committees in Northern Malawi.

Elsbet Lodenstein, Joyce M Molenaar, Christine Ingemann, Kondwani Botha, Jenipher Jere Mkandawire, Loan Liem, Jacqueline E W Broerse, Marjolein Dieleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. "I Don't Want to Read About It; I Want to Do It": Perspectives onAdvances in medical education and practice · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Elsbet LodensteinAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, VU University and KIT Gender, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.lodenstein@kit.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3379-8488
Joyce M MolenaarAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences Communication (VU University), De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Christine IngemannAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences Communication (VU University), De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kondwani BothaFoundation for Children's Rights, Mzuzu, Malawi.
Jenipher Jere MkandawireFoundation for Children's Rights, Mzuzu, Malawi.
Loan LiemSimavi, Naritaweg 135, 1043 BS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jacqueline E W BroerseAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences Communication (VU University), De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marjolein DielemanAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, VU University and KIT Health, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek W 07.45.201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Malawi, as in many low-and middle-income countries, health facility committees (HFCs) are involved in the governance of health services. Little is known about the approaches they use and the challenges they face. This study explores how HFCs monitor the quality of health services and how they demand accountability of health workers for their performance.

methodsDocumentary analysis and key informant interviews (7) were complemented by interviews with purposefully selected HFC members (22) and health workers (40) regarding their experiences with HFCs. Data analysis was guided by a coding scheme informed by social accountability concepts complemented by inductive analysis to identify participants' perceptions and meanings of processes of social accountability facilitated by HFCs.

resultsThe results suggest that HFCs address poor health worker performance (such as absenteeism, poor treatments and informal payments), and report severe misconduct to health authorities. The informal and constructive approach that most HFCs use is shaped by formal definitions and common expectations of the role of HFCs in service delivery as well as resource constraints. The primary function of social accountability through HFCs appears to be co-production: the management of social relations around the health facility and the promotion of a minimum level of access and quality of services.

conclusionsPolicymakers and HFC support programs should take into account the broad task description of HFCs and integrate social accountability approaches in existing quality of care programs. The study also underscores the need to clarify accountability arrangements and linkages with upward accountability approaches in the system.

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesHealth Facility AdministrationHealth PersonnelProfessional-Patient RelationsSocial ResponsibilityDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesHealth ResourcesHealth Services AdministrationHumansMalawiPrimary Health CareGovernanceHealth committeesHealth worker performanceMaternal healthQuality of careSocial accountability

Identifiers

PMID31046748
PMCPMC6498677

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.