ArticleHuman resources for health2019
Case study of a method of development of a selection process for community health workers in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Human resources for health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Village health workers as health diplomats: negotiating health and study participation in a malaria elimination trial in The Gambia.BMC health services research · 2022Trial
- A household-based community health worker programme for non-communicable disease, malnutrition, tuberculosis, HIV and maternal health: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial in Neno District, Malawi.BMJ global health · 2021Trial
- Recruitment and selection of community health workers in Iran; a thematic analysis.BMC public health · 2023Article
- An exploratory study of the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of community health worker programmes in conflict-affected South Sudan.Conflict and health · 2021Article
- Early Lessons From Launching an Innovative Community Health Household Model Across 3 Country Contexts.Global health, science and practice · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChoosing who should be recruited as a community health worker (CHW) is an important task, for their future performance partly depends on their ability to learn the required knowledge and skills, and their personal attributes. Developing a fair and effective selection process for CHWs is a challenging task, and reports of attempts to do so are rare. This paper describes a five-stage process of development and initial testing of a CHW selection process in two CHW programmes, one in Malawi and one in Ghana, highlighting the lessons learned at each stage and offering recommendations to other CHW programme providers seeking to develop their own selection processes. CASE PRESENTATION: The five stages of selection process development were as follows: (1) review an existing selection process, (2) conduct a job analysis, (3) elicit stakeholder opinions, (4) co-design the selection process and (5) test the selection process. Good practice in selection process development from the human resource literature and the principles of co-design were considered throughout. Validity, reliability, fairness, acceptability and feasibility-the determinants of selection process utility-were considered as appropriate during stages 1 to 4 and used to guide the testing in stage 5. The selection methods used by each local team were a written test and a short interview.
conclusionsWorking with stakeholders, including CHWs, helped to ensure the acceptability of the selection processes developed. Expectations of intensiveness-in particular the number of interviewers-needed to be managed as resources for selection are limited, and CHWs reported that any form of interview may be stressful. Testing highlighted the importance of piloting with CHWs to ensure clarity of wording of questions, interviewer training to maximise inter-rater reliability and the provision of guidance to applicants in advance of any selection events. Trade-offs between the different components of selection process utility are also likely to be required. Further refinements and evaluation of predictive validity (i.e. a sixth stage of development) would be recommended before roll-out.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.