MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991026100 · doi:10.1186/s12939-019-1065-4

Facilitating equitable community-level access to maternal health services: exploring the experiences of Rwanda’s community health workers

2019· article· en· W2991026100 on OpenAlexafffund
Germaine Tuyisenge, Valorie A. Crooks, Nicole S. Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersGlobal Affairs CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsHealth services researchPublic healthSocial policyHealth policyCommunity healthHealth equityEnvironmental healthCommunity health workersCommunity-based participatory researchHealth informaticsHealth servicesEconomic growthMedicineNursingPolitical sciencePopulationParticipatory action researchEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Rwanda, community health workers (CHWs) are an integral part of the health system. For maternal health, CHWs are involved in linking members of the communities in which they live to the formal health care system to address preventative, routine, and acute maternal care needs. Drawing on the findings from in-depth interviews with maternal health CHWs and observational insights in ten Rwandan districts, we identify specific strategies CHWs employ to provide equitable maternal care while operating in a low resource setting. METHODS: Using case study methodology approach, we conducted interviews with 22 maternal health CHWs to understand the nature of their roles in facilitating equitable access to maternal care in Rwanda at the community level. Interviews were conducted in five Rwandan districts. Participants shared their experiences of and perceptions on promoting equitable access to maternal health service in their communities. RESULTS: Four key themes emerged during the analytic process that characterize the contexts and strategic ways in which maternal health CHWs facilitate equitable access to maternal care in an environment of resource scarcity. They are: 1) community building; 2) physical landscapes, which serve as barriers or facilitators both to women's care access and CHWs' equitable service provision; 3) the post-crisis socio-political environment in Rwanda, which highlights resilience and the need to promote maternal health subsequent to the genocide of 1994; and, 4) the strategies used by CHWs to circumvent the constraints of a resource-poor setting and provide equitable maternal health services at the community level. CONCLUSION: Rwanda's maternal CHWs are heavily responsible for promoting equitable access to maternal health services. Consequently, they may be required to use their own resources for their practice, which could jeopardize their own socio-economic welfare and capacity to meet the demands of their families. Considering the unpaid and untrained nature of this position, we highlight the factors that threaten the sustainability of CHWs' role to facilitate equitable access to maternal care. These threats introduce turbulence into what is a relatively successful community-level health care initiative.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.249
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207