↓ Skip to main content

Improved harmonisation from policy dialogue? Realist perspectives from Guinea and Chad

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Improved harmonisation from policy dialogue? Realist perspectives from Guinea and Chad
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1458-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aku Kwamie, Juliet Nabyonga-Orem

Abstract

Harmonisation is a key principle of the Paris Declaration. The Universal Health Coverage (UHC) Partnership, an initiative of the European Union, the Government of Luxembourg and the World Health Organization, supported health policy dialogues between 2012 and 2015 in identified countries in the WHO African Region. The UHC Partnership has amongst its key objectives to strengthen national health policy development. In Guinea and Chad, policy dialogue focused on elaborating the national health plan and other key documents. This study is an analytical reflection inspired by realist evaluative approaches to understand whether policy dialogue led to improved harmonisation amongst health actors in Guinea and Chad, and if so, how and why. Interviews were conducted in Guinea and Chad with key informants at the national and sub-national government levels, civil society, and development partners. A review of relevant policy documents and reports was added to data collection to construct a full picture of the policy dialogue process. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations were used as the realist framework to guide the analysis on how participants' understanding of what policy dialogue was and the way the policy dialogue process unfolded led to improved harmonisation. Improved harmonisation as a result of policy dialogue was perceived to be stronger in Guinea than in Chad. While in both countries the participants held a shared view of what policy dialogue was and what it could achieve, and both policy dialogue processes were considered to be well implemented (i.e., well-facilitated, evidence-based, participatory, and consisted of recurring meetings and activities), certain contextual factors in Chad tempered the view of harmonisation as having improved. These were the pre-existence of dialogic policy processes that had exposed the actors to the potential that policy dialogue could have; a focus on elaborating provincial level strategies, which gave the sense that the process was more bottom-up; and the perception that there were acute resource constraints, which conditioned partners' interactions. Policy dialogue improves harmonisation in terms of fostering information exchange amongst partners; however, it does not appear to influence the operational procedures of the actors. This has implications for aid effectiveness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Researcher 7 16%
Other 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 11 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Psychology 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,263,786
of 8,082,038 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,055
of 3,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,585
of 257,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#139
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,082,038 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 257,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.