MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2151000213 · doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1037-3

Analyzing barriers and facilitators to the implementation of an action plan to strengthen the midwifery professional role: a Moroccan case study

2015· article· en· W2151000213 on OpenAlexafffund
Sabina Abou Malham, Marie Hatem, Nicole Leduc

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstitut pour la Recherche en Santé PubliqueUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsThematic analysisSociocultural evolutionNursing researchAction planNursingMedicineProfessional developmentMedical educationQualitative researchConceptual frameworkFocus groupThe Conceptual FrameworkCoachingHealth careHealth informaticsPsychologyPublic healthSociologyPolitical scienceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As part of a national strategy for reaching Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5 in Morocco, an action plan covering three systems (sociocultural, educational and professional) was developed to strengthen midwives' professional role in order to contribute to high quality maternity care. This study aimed to understand the implementation process by identifying the characteristics of this intervention and the dimensions of the three-systems which could act as barriers to/facilitators of the implementation process. We used a conceptual framework that builds on Hatem-Asmar's model that describes change in a health professional role; and on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research for our analysis. METHODS: An embedded case study with three levels of analysis was conducted during June and July 2010. Data were collected through 11 semi-structured interviews, 20 focus groups, training session observations and documents. A purposive sample of 106 multi-stakeholders from two Moroccan regions (health professionals, academic staff, students, medical administrative officers and health programmers) and one international consultant were recruited. A thematic analysis was conducted using QDA Miner. RESULTS: Data showed a failure to carry out the plan as intended. Seventeen barriers and seven facilitators were identified. Misalignment of the values, methods, actors and targets of the sociocultural system with the values, methods and actors of the educational and professional systems, on one hand, and with the intervention, on the other hand, were likely the greatest impediments to implementing the plan. The bureaucratic structure and lack of readiness of the sociocultural system were among the most influential barriers to: dissemination of information, involvement of key actors in the process and readiness of the educational system. The main facilitators were the values promoted related to human rights, and the national and international policies to strengthen midwifery and reduce maternal mortality. The plan was perceived as beneficial, but complex and externally driven. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that successful implementation requires redesigning the implementation strategy to adapt to the factors identified in our study. The results would be very useful to health planners seeking the expansion of such an intervention to other developing countries looking to strengthen midwives' role and to improve maternity health care services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services Research→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→