MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392799569 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002578

A qualitative analysis of community health worker perspectives on the implementation of the preconception and pregnancy phases of the Bukhali randomised controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4392799569 on OpenAlexafffund
Larske M. Soepnel, Shane A. Norris, Khuthala Mabetha, Molebogeng Motlhatlhedi, Nokuthula Gloria Nkosi, Stephen J. Lye, Catherine E. Draper

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSouth African Medical Research Council
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupMedicineNursingHealth careQualitative researchIntervention (counseling)Health literacyPublic healthRandomized controlled trialPsychologyFamily medicineGerontologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community health workers (CHWs) play an important role in health systems in low- and middle-income countries, including South Africa. Bukhali is a CHW-delivered intervention as part of a randomised controlled trial, to improve the health trajectories of young women in Soweto, South Africa. This study aimed to qualitatively explore factors influencing implementation of the preconception and pregnancy phases of Bukhali, from the perspective of the CHWs (Health Helpers, HHs) delivering the intervention. As part of the Bukhali trial process evaluation, three focus group discussions were conducted with the 13 HHs employed by the trial. A thematic approach was used to analyse the data, drawing on elements of a reflexive thematic and codebook approach. The following six themes were developed, representing factors impacting implementation of the HH roles: interaction with the existing public healthcare sector; participant perceptions of health; health literacy and language barriers; participants' socioeconomic constraints; family, partner, and community views of trial components; and the HH-participant relationship. HHs reported uses of several trial-based tools to overcome implementation challenges, increasing their ability to implement their roles as planned. The relationship of trust between the HH and participants seemed to function as one important mechanism for impact. The findings supported a number of adaptations to the implementation of Bukhali, such as intensified trial-based follow-up of referrals that do not receive management at clinics, continued HH training and community engagement parallel to trial implementation, with an increased emphasis on health-related stigma and education. HH perspectives on intervention implementation highlighted adaptations across three broad strategic areas: navigating and bridging healthcare systems, adaptability to individual participant needs, and navigating stigma around disease. These findings provide recommendations for the next phases of Bukhali, for other CHW-delivered preconception and pregnancy trials, and for the strengthening of CHW roles in clinical settings with similar implementation challenges. Trial registration: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry; PACTR201903750173871, Registered March 27, 2019.

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)0.127
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.172
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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1270.172
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207