↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the sub-national fidelity of national Initiatives in decentralized health systems: Integrated Primary Health Care Governance in Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
Title
Evaluating the sub-national fidelity of national Initiatives in decentralized health systems: Integrated Primary Health Care Governance in Nigeria
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2179-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ejemai Amaize Eboreime, Seye Abimbola, Felix Abrahams Obi, Obinna Ebirim, Olalekan Olubajo, John Eyles, Nonhlanhla Lynette Nxumalo, Faith Nankasa Mambulu

Abstract

Policy making, translation and implementation in politically and administratively decentralized systems can be challenging. Beyond the mere sub-national acceptance of national initiatives, adherence to policy implementation processes is often poor, particularly in low and middle-income countries. In this study, we explore the implementation fidelity of integrated PHC governance policy in Nigeria's decentralized governance system and its implications on closing implementation gaps with respect to other top-down health policies and initiatives. Having engaged policy makers, we identified 9 core components of the policy (Governance, Legislation, Minimum Service Package, Repositioning, Systems Development, Operational Guidelines, Human Resources, Funding Structure, and Office Establishment). We evaluated the level and pattern of implementation at state level as compared to the national guidelines using a scorecard approach. Contrary to national government's assessment of level of compliance, we found that sub-national governments exercised significant discretion with respect to the implementation of core components of the policy. Whereas 35 and 32% of states fully met national criteria for the structural domains of "Office Establishment" and Legislation" respectively, no state was fully compliant to "Human Resource Management" and "Funding" requirements, which are more indicative of functionality. The pattern of implementation suggests that, rather than implementing to improve outcomes, state governments may be more interested in executing low hanging fruits in order to access national incentives. Our study highlights the importance of evaluating implementation fidelity in providing evidence of implementation gaps towards improving policy execution, particularly in decentralized health systems. This approach will help national policy makers identify more effective ways of supporting lower tiers of governance towards improvement of health systems and outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users 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 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 159 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 21%
Researcher 29 18%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 6%
Student > Bachelor 8 5%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 46 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 28%
Social Sciences 19 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 4%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 53 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 September 2019.
All research outputs
#2,082,711
of 25,380,089 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#767
of 8,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,086
of 324,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#18
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,380,089 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 324,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.