Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33430877›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2021

Designing for Scale and taking scale to account: lessons from a community score card project in Uganda.

Elizabeth Ekirapa Kiracho, Christine Aanyu, Rebecca Racheal Apolot, Suzanne Namusoke Kiwanuka, Ligia Paina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Elizabeth Ekirapa KirachoDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda.
Christine AanyuDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda. aanyuchristinee@gmail.com.
Rebecca Racheal ApolotDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda.
Suzanne Namusoke KiwanukaDepartment of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, P.O. Box 7072, Kampala, Uganda.
Ligia PainaDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, 21205, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlanning for the implementation of community scorecards (CSC) is an important, though seldom documented process. Makerere University School of Public Health (MakSPH) and Future Health Systems Consortium set out to develop and test a sustainable and scalable CSC model. This paper documents the process of planning and adapting the design of the CSC, incorporating key domains of the scalable model such as embeddedness, legitimacy, feasibility and ownership, challenges encountered in this process and how they were mitigated.

methodsThe CSC intervention comprised of five rounds of scoring in five sub counties and one town council of Kibuku district. Data was drawn from ten focus group discussions, seven key informant interviews with local and sub national leaders, and one reflection meeting with the project team from MakSPH. More data was abstracted from notes of six quarterly stakeholder meetings and six quarterly project meetings. Data was analyzed using a thematic approach, drawing constructs outlined in the project's theory of change.

resultsEmbeddedness, legitimacy and ownership were promoted through aligning the model with existing processes and systems as well as the meaningful and strategic involvement of stakeholders and leaders at local and sub national level. The challenges encountered included limited technical capacity of stakeholders facilitating the CSC, poor functionality of existing community engagement platforms, and difficulty in promoting community participation without financial incentives. However, these challenges were mitigated through adjustments to the intervention design based on the feedback received.

conclusionGovernments seeking to scale up CSCs and to take scale to account should keenly adapt existing models to the local implementation context with strategic and meaningful involvement of key legitimate local and sub national leaders in decision making during the design and implementation process. However, they should watch out for elite capture and develop mitigating strategies. Social accountability practitioners should document their planning and adaptive design efforts to share good practices and lessons learned. Enhancing local capacity to implement CSCs should be ensured through use of existing local structures and provision of technical support by external or local partners familiar with the skill until the local partners are competent.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationSocial ResponsibilityCommunity Health ServicesFocus GroupsHealth PrioritiesHumansIntersectoral CollaborationModels, StatisticalQuality ImprovementResearch DesignUgandaAccountabilityCommunity Score CardsScale upTheory of change

Identifiers

PMID33430877
PMCPMC7802338

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.