| Title |
Identifying characteristics associated with performing recommended practices in maternal and newborn care among health facilities in Rwanda: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Resources for Health, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4491-10-13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather L Sipsma, Leslie A Curry, Jean-Baptiste Kakoma, Erika L Linnander, Elizabeth H Bradley |
| Abstract |
Although rates of maternal and neonatal mortality have decreased in many countries over the last two decades, they remain unacceptably high, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Nevertheless, we know little about the quality of facility-based maternal and newborn care in low-income countries and little about the association between quality of care and health worker training, supervision, and incentives in these settings. We therefore sought to examine the quality of facility-based maternal and newborn health care by describing the implementation of recommended practices for maternal and newborn care among health care facilities. We also aimed to determine whether increased training, supervision, and incentives for health workers were associated with implementing these recommended practices. We chose to study these aims in the Republic of Rwanda, where rates of maternal and newborn mortality are high and where substantial attention is currently focused on strengthening health workforce capacity and quality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Burundi | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 94 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 27% |
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 46% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 July 2012.
All research outputs
#14,913,921
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#979
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,036
of 177,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 177,906 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.