ArticleSouth African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care2022
Stakeholders' views on the utility and employment strategies of clinical associates.
Article in South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utilising clinical associates to address mental health service provision challenges in South Africa: the views of healthcare managers and providers.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical associates (ClinAs) were introduced into the South African healthcare system to increase the numbers of skilled health professionals. Little is known on how they are viewed. This study explored stakeholder views on the utility and employment strategies of ClinAs in the public sector.
methodsA mixed-methods design was used. An online survey was used to collect data from operational stakeholders, while online interviews explored strategic stakeholders' views.
resultsForty-five operational stakeholders participated. The view of ClinAs' contribution to the joint management of four common health conditions was strong (91% - 96%). The poorest agreement was their perceived contribution to maternal health (38%). There was a strong agreement (mean = 6.13, s.d.: 0.94) that conditions of ClinAs practice are met. Clinical associates were viewed as being able to work with others (mean = 6.11, s.d.: 0.98) and contribute to service improvement (mean = 6.47, s.d.: 0.62). There was a low agreement regarding the positive impact of recruitment (mean = 2.93, s.d.: 1.99) and retention strategies on ClinAs (mean = 2.75, s.d.: 1.51). The six key strategic stakeholders ascribed the slow progress made in career development, career progression, post creation and professional autonomy to the uncertainty regarding the scope of practice and perceived lack of support.
conclusionThe utility of ClinAs to provide health services in the public sector is clear, and their contribution is valued. The lack of progress around many of the human resource issues is a constraint that needs a champion if this cadre is to fully realise their potential.Contribution: Clinical associates are valued at service delivery level, but appear overlooked higher up.
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.