MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215445448 · doi:10.1186/s12960-021-00691-z

Factors influencing the performance of community health volunteers working within urban informal settlements in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative meta-synthesis review

2021· review· en· W3215445448 on OpenAlex
Michael Ogutu, Kui Muraya, David Mockler, Catherine Darker

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resources for Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCERNDepartment of Health and Social CareWellcome TrustWellcome
KeywordsThematic analysisQualitative researchHuman settlementCritical appraisalIncentiveEnvironmental healthMedicineBusinessGeographySociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on community health volunteer (CHV) programmes in urban informal settlements in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This is despite such settings accounting for a high burden of disease. Many factors intersect to influence the performance of CHVs working in urban informal settlements in LMICs. This review was conducted to identify both the programme level and contextual factors influencing performance of CHVs working in urban informal settlements in LMICs. METHODS: Four databases were searched for qualitative and mixed method studies focusing on CHVs working in urban and peri-urban informal settlements in LMICs. We focused on CHV programme outcome measures at CHV individual level. A total of 13 studies met the inclusion criteria and were double read to extract relevant data. Thematic coding was conducted, and data synthesized across ten categories of both programme and contextual factors influencing CHV performance. Quality was assessed using both the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAST); and certainty of evidence evaluated using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach. RESULTS: Key programme-level factors reported to enhance CHV performance in urban informal settlements in LMICs included both financial and non-financial incentives, training, the availability of supplies and resources, health system linkage, family support, and supportive supervision. At the broad contextual level, factors found to negatively influence the performance of CHVs included insecurity in terms of personal safety and the demand for financial and material support by households within the community. These factors interacted to shape CHV performance and impacted on implementation of CHV programmes in urban informal settlements. CONCLUSION: This review identified the influence of both programme-level and contextual factors on CHVs working in both urban and peri-urban informal settlements in LMICs. The findings suggest that programmes working in such settings should consider adequate remuneration for CHVs, integrated and holistic training, adequate supplies and resources, adequate health system linkages, family support and supportive supervision. In addition, programmes should also consider CHV personal safety issues and the community expectations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.253 · 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