Exploring variations in the implementation of a health system level policy intervention to improve maternal and child health outcomes in resource limited settings: A qualitative multiple case study from Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite growing literature, few studies have explored the implementation of policy interventions to reduce maternal and perinatal mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Even fewer studies explicitly articulate the theoretical approaches used to understand contextual influences on policy implementation. This under-use of theory may account for the limited understanding of the variations in implementation processes and outcomes. We share findings from a study exploring how a health system-level policy intervention was implemented to improve maternal and child health outcomes in a resource limited LMIC. METHODS: Our qualitative multiple case study was informed by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT). It was conducted across eight districts and among ten health facilities in Uganda, with 48 purposively selected participants. These included health care workers located at each of the cases, policy makers from the Ministry of Health, and from agencies and professional associations. Data were collected using semi-structured, in-depth interviews to understand uptake and use of Uganda's maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) policy and were inductively and deductively analyzed using NPT constructs and subconstructs. RESULTS: We identified six broad themes that may explain the observed variations in the implementation of the MPDSR policy. These include: 1) perception of the implementation of the policy, 2) leadership of the implementation process, 3) structural arrangements and coordination, 4) extent of management support and adequacy of resources, 5) variations in appraisal and reconfiguration efforts and 6) variations in barriers to implementation of the policy. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The variations in sense making and relational efforts, especially perceptions of the implementation process and leadership capacity, had ripple effects across operational and appraisal efforts. Adopting theoretically informed approaches to assessing the implementation of policy interventions is crucial, especially within resource limited settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".