Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32428027›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2020

Effects of the Community Score Card approach on reproductive health service-related outcomes in Malawi.

Sara Gullo, Christine Galavotti, Anne Sebert Kuhlmann, Thumbiko Msiska, Phil Hastings, C Nathan Marti

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Sara GulloCARE USA, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9192-5695
Christine GalavottiCARE USA, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Anne Sebert KuhlmannCollege for Public Health & Social Justice, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Thumbiko MsiskaCARE Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Phil HastingsFar Harbor, LLC, Austin, TX, United States of America.
C Nathan MartiFar Harbor, LLC, Austin, TX, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial accountability approaches are increasingly being employed in low-resource settings to improve government services. In line with the continuous quality improvement (CQI) philosophy that quality is the product of a linked chain, collaborative social accountability approaches like the Community Score Card (CSC) aim to empower clients and frontline service providers to transform their own lives and hold public officials to account for state obligations. Despite being a critical focus of collaborative social accountability approaches, to our knowledge, a quantitative survey of health workers to understand the impact of these approaches on their self-reported responsibilities and service provision has not been conducted. To fill this gap, we carried out a quantitative survey with health workers to assess the CSC's impact on health worker-reported service responsibilities and provision and complement women's self-reports.

methodsWe evaluated the effect of the CSC on reproductive health-related outcomes using a cluster-randomized design in Ntcheu district, Malawi. We matched 10 pairs of health facilities and surrounding catchment communities; one from each pair was randomly assigned to the intervention and control arms. The intervention communities and health workers each completed 3-4 cycles of the CSC process by endline. We then surveyed all health workers in the 20 intervention and comparison sites at endline (n = 412) to estimate the intervention's impact.

resultsSignificantly (p < .05) more health workers in the CSC intervention areas compared to control areas reported responsibility for antenatal care, comprehensive antenatal care counseling, recording of the number of pregnant and postpartum women seen each month, and the average age of their last family planning client was younger. In addition, marginally significantly (p < .10) more health workers in treatment versus control areas report visiting women at their home at least once during their pregnancy. However, health worker-reported responsibility for HIV testing was significantly lower in intervention areas than in control.

conclusionsThe CSC aims to empower health workers to collaborate with the community and rest of the health system to identify and overcome the diverse and context-specific range of performance barriers they face. In doing so, it aims to support them to demand and ensure quality care for themselves from the health system so they can, in turn, deliver quality services to clients. Our results contribute to the evidence that the CSC may hold promise at improving service provision. While there is increasing evidence that collaborative social accountability approaches like the CSC are effective means to improving reproductive health-related service provision and outcomes in low-resource settings, additional research is needed.

Indexed as

Reproductive Health ServicesSocial ResponsibilityAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelEmpowermentFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMalawiMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementSelf ReportTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32428027
PMCPMC7236973

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.