MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283692260 · doi:10.9745/ghsp-d-21-00413

Improving Community Health Worker Compensation: A Case Study From India Using Quantitative Projection Modeling and Incentive Design Principles

2022· article· en· W4283692260 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Science and Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsAshaIncentiveEarningsPaymentIncentive programBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Social determinants of healthPublic economicsActuarial scienceMedicinePublic healthEconomicsAccountingFinanceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Although community health workers (CHWs) are effective at mobilizing important health behaviors, there is limited evidence on how financial incentive systems can best be designed to drive their effectiveness. This study intends to bridge this evidence gap by analyzing the compensation model of India's accredited social health activist (ASHA) program and identifying areas of improvement in the system's design and implementation. METHODS: We analyze the ASHA program in Uttar Pradesh, India. ASHAs receive compensation through a mix of program-linked, performance-based, and routine activity-based incentive structures. Using multiple data sources, including a novel linked household and ASHA survey, we estimate ASHA performance-linked incentive earnings under different scenarios of ASHA actions and household behaviors. Juxtaposing statistical projection models and actual government payments, we identified which incentives promised the highest payments, which were claimed or not, which could be claimed more by increasing ASHA actions, and which were paid despite not meeting payment criteria. We also report findings on ASHA awareness of and experiences with claiming incentives. RESULTS: We find crucial gaps and implementation challenges in the ASHA incentive structure. ASHAs could double their earnings by completing certain tasks within their control. ASHAs may also be paid for partial completion of activities, as incentives are paid in lump sums for a series of activities rather than for each activity. Family planning incentives have the largest gap between potential and actual earnings. Incentivizing ASHAs for achieving certain health outcomes is inefficient, as no clear linkage was found between the achievability of such health outcomes and the claim amounts. CONCLUSION: There are several opportunities for improving CHW compensation, from improving the incentive claims process to shifting focus to achievable outcomes. Optimizing incentive system designs can further enhance CHW effectiveness globally to affect key health behaviors.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.255 · 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