Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32552727›Full record

Observational studyBMC health services research2020

Professional advice for primary healthcare workers in Ethiopia: a social network analysis.

Kate Sabot, Karl Blanchet, Della Berhanu, Neil Spicer, Joanna Schellenberg

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Kate SabotThe Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK. kate.sabot@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-1505
Karl BlanchetDepartment of Global Health, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Della BerhanuThe Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Neil SpicerDepartment of Global Health, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Joanna SchellenbergThe Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1017031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn an era of increasingly competitive funding, governments and donors will be looking for creative ways to extend and maximise resources. One such means can include building upon professional advice networks to more efficiently introduce, scale up, or change programmes and healthcare provider practices. This cross-sectional, mixed-methods, observational study compared professional advice networks of healthcare workers in eight primary healthcare units across four regions of Ethiopia. Primary healthcare units include a health centre and typically five satellite health posts.

methodsOne hundred sixty staff at eight primary healthcare units were interviewed using a structured tool. Quantitative data captured the frequency of healthcare worker advice seeking and giving on providing antenatal, childbirth, postnatal and newborn care. Network and actor-level metrics were calculated including density (ratio of ties between actors to all possible ties), centrality (number of ties incident to an actor), distance (average number of steps between actors) and size (number of actors within the network). Following quantitative network analyses, 20 qualitative interviews were conducted with network study participants from four primary healthcare units. Qualitative interviews aimed to interpret and explain network properties observed. Data were entered, analysed or visualised using Excel 6.0, UCINET 6.0, Netdraw, Adobe InDesign and MaxQDA10 software packages.

resultsThe following average network level metrics were observed: density .26 (SD.11), degree centrality .45 (SD.08), distance 1.94 (SD.26), number of ties 95.63 (SD 35.46), size of network 20.25 (SD 3.65). Advice networks for antenatal or maternity care were more utilised than advice networks for post-natal or newborn care. Advice networks were typically limited to primary healthcare unit staff, but not necessarily to supervisors. In seeking advice, a colleague's level of training and knowledge were valued over experience. Advice exchange primarily took place in person or over the phone rather than over email or online fora. There were few barriers to seeking advice.

conclusionInformal, inter-and intra-cadre advice networks existed. Fellow primary healthcare unit staff were preferred, particularly midwives, but networks were not limited to the primary healthcare unit. Additional research is needed to associate network properties with outcomes and pilot network interventions with central actors.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPrimary Health CareSocial Network AnalysisAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMaternal Health ServicesMidwiferyParturitionPregnancyProfessional PracticeSocial NetworkingAdvice networksEthiopiaHealthcare workersHealth extension workersKnowledge sharingMaternal and newborn healthPrimary careProfessional adviceSocial network analysis

Identifiers

PMID32552727
PMCPMC7302001

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.