↓ Skip to main content

Taking Severe Acute Malnutrition Treatment Back to the Community: Practical Experiences from Nutrition Coverage Surveys

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Taking Severe Acute Malnutrition Treatment Back to the Community: Practical Experiences from Nutrition Coverage Surveys
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00198
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lenka Blanárová, Eleanor Rogers, Carine Magen, Sophie Woodhead

Abstract

The community-based management of acute malnutrition treatment model was introduced to respond to the limited coverage of the inpatient model. Yet until the introduction of quick and low-cost approaches to measuring coverage, its reach was unknown. Once the Coverage Monitoring Network (CMN) had been created to roll out the routine measurement of direct coverage estimates to implementers, they found that programs were reaching only a third of cases. The barriers found to be limiting coverage were the result of the limited perceived value, and therefore focus, on the community. Therefore, the Network used the coverage assessment methodology as a way to encourage implementers to engage more fully with the community. By introducing small changes to the project cycle, specifically a participatory approach to assessments, program design and implementation, the CMN has changed the way implementers engage with the community. Instead of viewing them as passive receivers of services, they have shifted their perspective to view them as service delivery partners. The process provides implementers with a deeper understanding of the context while allowing the community to better understand the program, its challenges, and the identification of solutions. The Network observed implementers from Ministries of Health, and non-governmental organizations, adjusted their understanding and approach to service provision, which is critical if we are to see sustainable increases in program coverage. These experiences show that there is an appetite from implementers in multiple contexts for these practical and simple tools for re-engaging the community.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 27%
Researcher 8 22%
Other 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 December 2016.
All research outputs
#6,921,437
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,238
of 10,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,400
of 322,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#26
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,019 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.