↓ Skip to main content

Primary health care in rural Malawi - a qualitative assessment exploring the relevance of the community-directed interventions approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
175 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
Primary health care in rural Malawi - a qualitative assessment exploring the relevance of the community-directed interventions approach
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-328
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Makaula, Paul Bloch, Hastings T Banda, Grace Bongololo Mbera, Charles Mangani, Alexandra de Sousa, Edwin Nkhono, Samuel Jemu, Adamson S Muula

Abstract

Primary Health Care (PHC) is a strategy endorsed for attaining equitable access to basic health care including treatment and prevention of endemic diseases. Thirty four years later, its implementation remains sub-optimal in most Sub-Saharan African countries that access to health interventions is still a major challenge for a large proportion of the rural population. Community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTi) and community-directed interventions (CDI) are participatory approaches to strengthen health care at community level. Both approaches are based on values and principles associated with PHC. The CDI approach has successfully been used to improve the delivery of interventions in areas that have previously used CDTi. However, little is known about the added value of community participation in areas without prior experience with CDTi. This study aimed at assessing PHC in two rural Malawian districts without CDTi experience with a view to explore the relevance of the CDI approach. We examined health service providers' and beneficiaries' perceptions on existing PHC practices, and their perspectives on official priorities and strategies to strengthen PHC.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 2 1%
Netherlands 2 1%
Indonesia 2 1%
Malawi 2 1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Bhutan 1 <1%
Unknown 163 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 25%
Student > Bachelor 24 14%
Researcher 24 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 13%
Student > Postgraduate 17 10%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 15 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 16%
Social Sciences 23 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 4%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 22 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,456,014
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,712
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,751
of 217,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#18
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 217,590 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.