MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382987629 · doi:10.29392/001c.82032

Understanding the factors influencing health workers’ choice of workplace locations: a qualitative description of primary healthcare workers’ perspectives in Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4382987629 on OpenAlexafffund
Sunny C Okoroafor, Chukwuemeka E Nwachukwu, James Avoka Asamani, Adam Ahmat, Martin Osubor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsGlobal Affairs Canada
FundersGlobal Affairs Canada
KeywordsWorkforceHealth careQualitative researchQuality (philosophy)Work (physics)BusinessNursingWorkloadMedicinePublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Universal access to a qualified, skilled, motivated and equitably distributed health workforce is pertinent for the delivery of quality health services needed to achieve national health sector goals and sustainable development goals. However, there remains a shortage of health workers attributed to health workers’ choices of not taking up postings due to the characteristics of workplace locations, amongst other factors. This study sought to understand the factors influencing primary healthcare workers’ choice of workplace locations in Nigeria. Methods This study applied a qualitative research design. We interviewed 41 primary healthcare workers, including nurses, midwives, and community health practitioners, in Bauchi and Cross River States in Nigeria. The interviews elicited responses on the important issues that health workers consider when thinking of taking up or staying in a work location. Results We found that the working conditions, living environment and human resources for health (HRH) management practices influence the choice of work location amongst health workers. For working conditions, the quality of facilities, workload concerns, the scope of practice and community support were suggested as important factors. The living environment, specifically the availability of quality housing or an allowance to pay for quality accommodation, availability of transport facilities, and quality schools for children’s education were suggested as important factors. Lastly, the HRH management practices linked to supportive management, remunerations, career advancement and continuing education were highlighted as central factors. Conclusions Our study highlights the importance of work location to health workers. In practice, there is a need for policymakers and health planners to gain and apply contextual evidence on factors influencing health workers’ choice of workplace locations in health and HRH planning and management. This is pertinent in designing and implementing tailored interventions for ensuring the equitable distribution of health workers.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global Health ReportsSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207