Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35189983›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2022

Don't change who we are but give us a chance: confronting the potential of community health worker certification for workforce recognition and exclusion.

Ashley Kissinger, Shakira Cordova, Ann Keller, Jane Mauldon, Lori Copan, Claire Snell Rood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Engaging with peers to integrate community care: Knowledge synthesis and conceptual map.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  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.

Ashley KissingerCenter for Healthy Communities, Environmental Health Investigations Branch, California Department of Public Health, 850 Marina Bay Parkway, Building P-3, CA, 94804, Richmond, USA. Ashley.kissinger@cdph.ca.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5329-2823
Shakira CordovaSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Ann KellerSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Jane MauldonGoldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Lori CopanCenter for Healthy Communities, Environmental Health Investigations Branch, California Department of Public Health, 850 Marina Bay Parkway, Building P-3, CA, 94804, Richmond, USA.
Claire Snell RoodSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor community health workers (CHWs) and promotores de salud (CHWs who primarily serve Latinx communities and are grounded in a social, rather than a clinical model of care), the process of certification highlights the tension between developing a certified workforce with formal requirements (i.e., certified CHWs) and valuing CHWs, without formal requirements, based on their roles, knowledge, and being part of the communities where they live and work (i.e., non-certified CHWs). California serves as an ideal case study to examine how these two paths can coexist. California's CHW workforce represents distinct ideologies of care (e.g., clinical CHWs, community-based CHWs, and promotores de salud) and California stakeholders have debated certification for nearly twenty years but have not implemented such processes.

methodsWe employed purposive sampling to interview 108 stakeholders (i.e., 66 CHWs, 11 program managers, and 31 system-level participants) to understand their perspectives on the opportunities and risks that certification may raise for CHWs and the communities they serve. We conducted focus groups with CHWs, interviews with program managers and system-level participants, and observations of public forums that discussed CHW workforce issues. We used a thematic analysis approach to identify, analyze, and report themes.

resultsSome CHW participants supported inclusive certification training opportunities while others feared that certification might erode their identity and undermine their work in communities. Some program managers and system-level participants acknowledged the opportunities of certification but also expressed concerns that certification may distance CHWs from their communities. Program managers and system-level participants also highlighted that certification may not address all challenges related to integrating CHWs into health care systems. CHWs, program managers, and system-level participants agreed that CHWs should be involved in certification discussions and decision making.

conclusionsTo address participant concerns, our findings recommend California stakeholders build a voluntary certification process structured with multiple pathways to overcome entry barriers of traditional certification processes, maintain CHW identity, and protect diversity within the workforce. Positioning CHWs as decision makers will be critical when designing state certification processes.

Indexed as

CertificationCommunity healthCommunity health workersPromotores de saludQualitative methodsWorkforce development

Identifiers

PMID35189983
PMCPMC8862575

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.