↓ Skip to main content

Measuring and understanding the effects of a performance based financing scheme applied to nutrition services in Burundi—a mixed method impact evaluation design

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Measuring and understanding the effects of a performance based financing scheme applied to nutrition services in Burundi—a mixed method impact evaluation design
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12939-016-0382-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manassé Nimpagaritse, Catherine Korachais, Dominique Roberfroid, Patrick Kolsteren, Moulay Driss Zine Eddine El Idrissi, Bruno Meessen

Abstract

Malnutrition is a huge problem in Burundi. In order to improve the provision of services at hospital, health centre and community levels, the Ministry of Health is piloting the introduction of malnutrition prevention and care indicators within its performance based financing (PBF) scheme. Paying for units of services and for qualitative indicators is expected to enhance provision and quality of these nutrition services, as PBF has done, in Burundi and elsewhere, for several other services. This paper presents the protocol for the impact evaluation of the PBF scheme applied to malnutrition. The research design consists in a mixed methods model adopting a sequential explanatory design. The quantitative component is a cluster-randomized controlled evaluation design: among the 90 health centres selected for the study, half receive payment related to their results in malnutrition activities, while the other half get a budget allocation. Qualitative research will be carried out both during the intervention period and at the end of the quantitative evaluation. Data are collected from 1) baseline and follow-up surveys of 90 health centres and 6,480 households with children aged 6 to 23 months, 2) logbooks filled in weekly in health centres, and 3) in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. The evaluation aims to provide the best estimate of the impact of the project on malnutrition outcomes in the community as well as outputs at the health centre level (malnutrition care outputs) and to describe quantitatively and qualitatively the changes that took place (or did not take place) within health centres as a result of the program. Although PBF schemes are blooming in low in-come countries, there is still a need for evidence, especially on the impact of revising the list of remunerated indicators. It is expected that this impact evaluation will be helpful for the national policy dialogue in Burundi, but it will also provide key evidence for countries with an existing PBF scheme and confronted with malnutrition problems on the appropriateness to extend the strategy to nutrition services. ClinicalTrials.gov PRS Identifier: NCT02721160 ; registered March 2016.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 28%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 12%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 18 21%

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 28 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,961,466
of 12,719,839 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#366
of 1,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,984
of 262,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,719,839 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 262,711 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them