↓ Skip to main content

Establishing a Professional Profile of Community Health Workers: Results from a National Study of Roles, Activities and Training

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Health, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
Title
Establishing a Professional Profile of Community Health Workers: Results from a National Study of Roles, Activities and Training
Published in
Journal of Community Health, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10900-011-9475-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maia Ingram, Kerstin M. Reinschmidt, Ken A. Schachter, Chris L. Davidson, Samantha J. Sabo, Jill Guernsey De Zapien, Scott C. Carvajal

Abstract

Community Health Workers (CHWs) have gained national recognition for their role in addressing health disparities and are increasingly integrated into the health care delivery system. There is a lack of consensus, however, regarding empirical evidence on the impact of CHW interventions on health outcomes. In this paper, we present results from the 2010 National Community Health Worker Advocacy Survey (NCHWAS) in an effort to strengthen a generalized understanding of the CHW profession that can be integrated into ongoing efforts to improve the health care delivery system. Results indicate that regardless of geographical location, work setting, and demographic characteristics, CHWs generally share similar professional characteristics, training preparation, and job activities. CHWs are likely to be female, representative of the community they serve, and to work in community health centers, clinics, community-based organizations, and health departments. The most common type of training is on-the-job and conference training. Most CHWs work with clients, groups, other CHWs and less frequently community leaders to address health issues, the most common of which are chronic disease, prevention and health care access. Descriptions of CHW activities documented in the survey demonstrate that CHWs apply core competencies in a synergistic manner in an effort to assure that their clients get the services they need. NCHWAS findings suggest that over the past 50 years, the CHW field has become standardized in response to the unmet needs of their communities. In research and practice, the field would benefit from being considered a health profession rather than an intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 121 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Other 7 6%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 13%
Psychology 7 6%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 32 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2012.
All research outputs
#15,256,901
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#858
of 1,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,913
of 132,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 132,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.