Patterns of authorship on community health workers in low-and-middle-income countries: an analysis of publications (2012-2016).

Clicks: 434
ID: 50793
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #6 of 37 articles by views in BMJ global health

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Studies of authorship provide a barometer of local research capacity and ownership of research, considered key to defining appropriate research priorities, developing contextualised responses to health problems and ensuring that research informs policy and practice. This paper reports on an analysis of patterns of research authorship of the now substantial literature on community health workers (CHWs) in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) for the 5-year period: 2012-2016.A search of five databases identified a total of 649 indexed publications reporting on CHWs in LMICs and meeting the inclusion criteria. The country, region and income classification of studies, affiliations (country, organisation) of lead (first) and last authors, proportions of all authors locally affiliated, programme area (eg, maternal child health) and funding source were extracted.The 649 papers reported experiences from 51 countries, 55% from middle-income countries (MICs) and 32% from low-income countries (LICs), with the remaining 13% multicountry studies. Overall, 47% and 54% of all the papers had a high-income country (HIC) lead and last author, respectively. Authorship followed three patterns: (1) a concentrated HIC pattern, with US-based authors numerically dominating LIC-based and multicountry studies; (2) an MIC pattern of autonomy, with a handful of countries-India, South Africa and Brazil, in particular-leading >70% of their CHW publications and (3) a pattern of unevenness among LICs in their lead authorship of publications varying from 14% (Malawi) to 54% (Uganda). Region, programme area and funding source were all associated with the distribution of authorship across country income categories.The findings in this analysis mirror closely that of other authorship studies in global health. Collectively these provide a common message-that investments in global health programmes in the Millennium Development Goal era may have benefited health but not necessarily capacity for knowledge generation in LMICs.
Reference Key
schneider2018patternsbmj Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Schneider, Helen;Maleka, Nelisiwe;
Journal BMJ global health
Year 2018
DOI
10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000797
URL
Keywords
health systems health services research descriptive study

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.