↓ Skip to main content

Nationwide implementation of integrated community case management of childhood illness in Rwanda

Overview of attention for article published in Global Health : Science and Practice Journal, August 2014
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nationwide implementation of integrated community case management of childhood illness in Rwanda
Published in
Global Health : Science and Practice Journal, August 2014
DOI 10.9745/ghsp-d-14-00080
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine Mugeni, Adam C Levine, Richard M Munyaneza, Epiphanie Mulindahabi, Hannah C Cockrell, Justin Glavis-Bloom, Cameron T Nutt, Claire M Wagner, Erick Gaju, Alphonse Rukundo, Jean Pierre Habimana, Corine Karema, Fidele Ngabo, Agnes Binagwaho

Abstract

Between 2008 and 2011, Rwanda introduced integrated community case management (iCCM) of childhood illness nationwide. Community health workers in each of Rwanda's nearly 15,000 villages were trained in iCCM and equipped for empirical diagnosis and treatment of pneumonia, diarrhea, and malaria; for malnutrition surveillance; and for comprehensive reporting and referral services. We used data from the Rwanda health management information system (HMIS) to calculate monthly all-cause under-5 mortality rates, health facility use rates, and community-based treatment rates for childhood illness in each district. We then compared a 3-month baseline period prior to iCCM implementation with a seasonally matched comparison period 1 year after iCCM implementation. Finally, we compared the actual changes in all-cause child mortality and health facility use over this time period with the changes that would have been expected based on baseline trends in Rwanda. The number of children receiving community-based treatment for diarrhea and pneumonia increased significantly in the 1-year period after iCCM implementation, from 0.83 cases/1,000 child-months to 3.80 cases/1,000 child-months (P = .01) and 0.25 cases/1,000 child-months to 5.28 cases/1,000 child-months (P<.001), respectively. On average, total under-5 mortality rates declined significantly by 38% (P<.001), and health facility use declined significantly by 15% (P = .006). These decreases were significantly greater than would have been expected based on baseline trends. This is the first study to demonstrate decreases in both child mortality and health facility use after implementing iCCM of childhood illness at a national level. While our study design does not allow for direct attribution of these changes to implementation of iCCM, these results are in line with those of prior studies conducted at the sub-national level in other low-income countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Rwanda 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Bolivia, Plurinational State of 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 216 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 26%
Researcher 47 21%
Student > Postgraduate 17 7%
Other 15 7%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Other 38 17%
Unknown 37 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 83 37%
Social Sciences 32 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 46 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,586,064
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Global Health : Science and Practice Journal
#252
of 888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,740
of 241,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health : Science and Practice Journal
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 888 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 241,585 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.