↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the role of clinical officers in providing reproductive health services in Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
Title
Evaluating the role of clinical officers in providing reproductive health services in Kenya
Published in
Human Resources for Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12960-018-0296-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianne Corine Darwinkel, Julius Maina Nduru, Reuben Waswa Nabie, John Anzetse Aswani

Abstract

Most sub-Saharan African countries have too few reproductive health (RH) specialists, resulting in high RH-related mortality and morbidity. In Kenya, task sharing in RH began in 2002, with the training of clinical officer(s)-reproductive health (CORH). Little is known about them and the extent of their role in the health system. In 2016, we conducted a retrospective, quantitative two-stage study in Kenya to evaluate the use of CORH and 28 of their curriculum-derived RH competencies, to determine their contribution to expanded access to RH care. CORH were surveyed, using structured questionnaires and telephone interviews. Data on the frequency with which CORH used specified competencies were collected from health records in selected facilities. Forty-nine of all 104 CORH participated in the survey (47%). Forty-eight (98%) had worked in the clinical area, and 79% were still engaging in clinical work. All 48 worked in emergency obstetrics, emergency gynaecology, and nonemergency RH, and 38 (79%) filled clinical leadership positions. Vasectomy was least performed, by only 9 (18%) CORH. All other competencies were applied by at least half of the CORH, and 22 competencies by more than three quarters. Forty-one (84%) CORH performed caesarean section (CS). Teaching and management were other common responsibilities. Data were collected from 12 facilities and analysed for 11. They generally confirmed the initial survey findings: CORH worked as obstetrics and gynaecology consultants and used most of their competencies. Analysis was based on 118 months of theatre records. CORH made significant contributions to their facility's capacity to perform RH surgery: most respondents performed at least 25% of these surgeries. They performed an average of six CS per month and more than 25% of perineal tear repairs (33%), uterus repairs (33%), manual placenta removals (26%), bilateral tubal ligations (39%), and cervical cancer staging (27%). Some experienced CORH conducted procedures beyond their training. CORH expand access to emergency RH care. Their contributions span all areas of obstetric and gynaecological care, mentoring new health workers and expanding their scope of practice. However, the generally poor status of records documenting healthcare provision limits their usability in evaluation and research.

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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 44 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 15%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 46 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 November 2022.
All research outputs
#6,446,325
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#678
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,357
of 339,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#17
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 339,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.