↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the potential of rural and urban private facilities in implementing child health interventions in Mukono district, central Uganda–a cross sectional study

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
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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 potential of rural and urban private facilities in implementing child health interventions in Mukono district, central Uganda–a cross sectional study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1529-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizeus Rutebemberwa, Esther Buregyeya, Sham Lal, Sîan E. Clarke, Kristian S. Hansen, Pascal Magnussen, Philip LaRussa, Anthony K. Mbonye

Abstract

Private facilities are the first place of care seeking for many sick children. Involving these facilities in child health interventions may provide opportunities to improve child welfare. The objective of this study was to assess the potential of rural and urban private facilities in diagnostic capabilities, operations and human resource in the management of malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea. A survey was conducted in pharmacies, private clinics and drug shops in Mukono district in October 2014. An assessment was done on availability of diagnostic equipment for malaria, record keeping, essential drugs for the treatment of malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea; the sex, level of education, professional and in-service training of the persons found attending to patients in these facilities. A comparison was made between urban and rural facilities. Univariate and bivariate analysis was done. A total of 241 private facilities were assessed with only 47 (19.5 %) being in rural areas. Compared to urban areas, rural private facilities were more likely to be drug shops (OR 2.80; 95 % CI 1.23-7.11), less likely to be registered (OR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.16-0.60), not have trained clinicians, less likely to have people with tertiary education (OR 0.34; 95 % CI 0.17-0.66) and less likely to have zinc tablets (OR 0.38; 95 % CI 0.19-0.78). In both urban and rural areas, there was low usage of stock cards and patient registers. About half of the facilities in both rural and urban areas attended to at least one sick child in the week prior to the interview. There were big gaps between rural and urban private facilities with rural ones having less trained personnel and less zinc tablets' availability. In both rural and urban areas, record keeping was low. Child health interventions need to build capacity of private facilities with special focus on rural areas where child mortality is higher and capacity of facilities lower.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 38%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Psychology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 8 14%

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 23 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,280,679
of 8,093,786 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,081
of 3,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,399
of 236,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#122
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,093,786 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 3,038 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 236,223 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 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.