↓ Skip to main content

You pray to your God: A qualitative analysis of challenges in the provision of safe, timely, and affordable surgical care in Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2018
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
You pray to your God: A qualitative analysis of challenges in the provision of safe, timely, and affordable surgical care in Uganda
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0195986
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine Albutt, Rachel R. Yorlets, Maria Punchak, Peter Kayima, Didacus B. Namanya, Geoffrey A. Anderson, Mark G. Shrime

Abstract

Five billion people lack access to safe, affordable, and timely surgical and anesthesia care. Significant challenges remain in the provision of surgical care in low-resource settings. Uganda is no exception. From September to November 2016, we conducted a mixed-methods countrywide surgical capacity assessment at 17 randomly selected public hospitals in Uganda. Researchers conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders to understand factors related to the provision of surgical care. The framework approach was used for thematic and explanatory data analysis. The Ugandan public health care sector continues to face significant challenges in the provision of safe, timely, and affordable surgical care. These challenges can be broadly grouped into preparedness and policy, service delivery, and the financial burden of surgical care. Hospital staff reported challenges including: (1) significant delays in accessing surgical care, compounded by a malfunctioning referral system; (2) critical workforce shortages; (3) operative capacity that is limited by inadequate infrastructure and overwhelmed by emergency and obstetric volume; (4) supply chain difficulties pertaining to provision of essential medications, equipment, supplies, and blood; (5) significant, variable, and sometimes catastrophic expenditures for surgical patients and their families; and (6) a lack of surgery-specific policies and priorities. Despite these challenges, innovative strategies are being used in the public to provide surgical care to those most in need. Barriers to the provision of surgical care are cross-cutting and involve constraints in infrastructure, service delivery, workforce, and financing. Understanding current strengths and shortfalls of Uganda's surgical system is a critical first step in developing effective, targeted policy and programming that will build and strengthen its surgical capacity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Researcher 15 11%
Other 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 42 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 12%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 50 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 22 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,961,052
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#24,836
of 202,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,208
of 328,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#505
of 3,455 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 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 202,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 328,431 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,455 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.