↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the twinning model in the Rwandan Human Resources for Health Program: goal setting, satisfaction and perceived skill transfer

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, January 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Assessing the twinning model in the Rwandan Human Resources for Health Program: goal setting, satisfaction and perceived skill transfer
Published in
Globalization and Health, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12992-016-0141-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esperance Ndenga, Glorieuse Uwizeye, Dana R. Thomson, Eric Uwitonze, Joel Mubiligi, Bethany L. Hedt-Gauthier, Michael Wilkes, Agnes Binagwaho

Abstract

Because of the shortage of health professionals, particularly in specialty areas, Rwanda initiated the Human Resources for Health (HRH) Program. In this program, faculty from United States teaching institutions (USF) "twin" with Rwandan Faculty (RF) to transfer skills. This paper assesses the twinning model, exploring USF and RF goal setting, satisfaction and perceptions of the effectiveness of skill transfer within the twinning model. All USF and RF in the HRH Program from August 2012-May 2014 were invited to participate. An 85-item questionnaire for USF and 71-item questionnaire for RF were administered via Survey Monkey in April and May 2014. Associations among primary outcomes were assessed and factors related with outcomes were modeled using logistic regression. Most RF and USF reported setting goals with their twin (89 % and 71 %, respectively). Half of RF (52 %) reported effective skill transfer compared to 10 % of USF. Only 38 % of RF and 28 % of USF reported being very satisfied with the twinning model. There was significant overlap in the three operational outcomes. For RF, the following factors were associated with outcomes: for effective skill transfer, being able to communicate in a common language and working at a nursing site outside of Kigali; and for satisfaction, 7+ years of professional experience and being part of a male RF-female USF twin pair. For USF, the following factors were associated with outcomes: for setting goals, prior teaching experience; and for satisfaction, experience in low resource settings for one month or less and feeling that HRH promotes a culture of respect. Twinning is the cornerstone of the HRH Program in Rwanda. These findings helped the HRH team identify key areas to improve the twinning experience including better recruitment and orientation of USF and RF, consideration of additional factors during the twinning process, provide language training support, facilitate joint twin activities and cross-cultural training and improve the site leadership buy-in and support of the program. These results can inform other programs using twinning to develop skills in the health workforce.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Unknown 123 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 27 22%
Unknown 28 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 18%
Social Sciences 15 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 6%
Psychology 5 4%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 28 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,895,399
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#566
of 1,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,877
of 396,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,106 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 396,721 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.