MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385335533 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288767

An in-depth qualitative study of health care providers’ experiences of performance-based financing program as a nation-wide adopted policy in Cameroon: A principal-agent perspective

2023· article· en· W4385335533 on OpenAlexafffund
Miriam Nkangu, Julian Little, Raywat Deonandan, Roland Pongou, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsGlobal Affairs CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsFocus groupNonprobability samplingHealth careAccountabilityQualitative researchTransparency (behavior)AutonomyNegotiationEquity (law)Public relationsMedicineBusinessNursingMarketingSociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEnvironmental healthPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The study applies the principal-agent approach to explore providers' experiences before and after the introduction of performance-based financing (PBF) in Cameroon, challenges and facilitators in the implementation process, and mechanisms in place to ensure sustainability. METHODS: The study was an in-depth qualitative study whose goal was to provide multiple descriptions of experiences and insights from a principal-agent analysis perspective. Purposive sampling was used to identify the key characteristics of the participants relevant to the study. A snowballing technique was used to further identify eligible participants. Only healthcare providers who were exposed to the previous system and could reflect on and provide meaningful data that captured the everyday experiences before and after the implementation of PBF were included. Data were collected from three districts in the Southwest region of Cameroon from May 2021 to August 2021. Data were transcribed and analyzed using MaxQDA. RESULTS: A total of 17 interviews and 3 focus group discussions (24 participants) were conducted with healthcare providers and key stakeholders involved in PBF. The respondents described a range of changes that they had experienced since the introduction of PBF. Each of these changes was categorized as either positive or negative. Positive changes were framed into 14 dominant categories: motivation, negotiations, innovation, resource allocation, autonomy, decentralization, transparency, improved quality of care, separation of function, performance, equity considerations, opportunity to recruit, participation in decision-making, and improved access to and utilization of maternal health services. The main challenges (negative experiences) reported were framed into nine categories: management of change, retention issues, conflict of interest, poor understanding of the PBF concept, resistance to change, verification challenges, delays in payment of PBF incentives, data entry and documentation, and challenges in meeting the equity considerations of the poor and vulnerable. Despite the challenges, providers preferred the decentralized approach to the centralized system. CONCLUSION: PBF is a national strategy for achieving universal health coverage in Cameroon, and the experiences of providers provide a vital guide to refine national policy. The introduction of PBF has provided positive changes to providers' quality of care when compared to the previous system. Addressing the delays in PBF payments will help to overcome the challenges to implementation and provide opportunities for health facilities to be more efficient and improve their performance. Despite the limitations of delay in payment, PBF helps to align the incentives of the health workers (agent) with those of the Ministry of Health (principal).

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→