| Title |
A process evaluation of performance-based incentives for village health workers in Kisoro district, Uganda
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Resources for Health, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4491-12-19 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James S Miller, Sam Musominali, Michael Baganizi, Gerald A Paccione |
| Abstract |
Designing effective incentive systems for village health workers (VHWs) represents a longstanding policy issue with substantial impact on the success and sustainability of VHW programs. Using performance-based incentives (PBI) for VHWs is an approach that has been proposed and implemented in some programs, but has not received adequate review and evaluation in the peer-reviewed literature. We conducted a process evaluation examining the use of PBI for VHWs in Kisoro, Uganda. In this system, VHWs are paid based on 20 indicators, divided among routine follow-up visits, health education activities, new patient identifications, sanitation coverage, and uptake of priority health services. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Senegal | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 2 | 1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Sierra Leone | 1 | <1% |
| Congo, The Democratic Republic of the | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 145 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 40 | 26% |
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 33 | 22% |
| Unknown | 26 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 28% |
| Social Sciences | 22 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 8 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 16% |
| Unknown | 30 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 May 2014.
All research outputs
#7,301,532
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#763
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,483
of 241,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#16
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 241,515 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 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.