↓ 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 (67th 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
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 Mendeley
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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 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 218 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 21%
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 10%
Student > Postgraduate 18 8%
Other 40 17%
Unknown 44 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 14%
Social Sciences 26 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 3%
Other 38 17%
Unknown 54 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#7,202,561
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,554
of 7,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,791
of 170,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#51
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 170,537 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.