BackgroundAs part of our review of the evidence of the effectiveness of community–based primary health care (CBPHC) in improving maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH), we summarize here the common delivery strategies of projects, programs and field research studies (collectively referred to as projects) that have demonstrated effectiveness in improving child mortality. Other articles in this series address specifically the effects of CBPHC on improving MNCH, while this paper explores the specific strategies used.MethodsWe screened 12 166 published reports in PubMed of community–based approaches to improving maternal, neonatal and child health in high–mortality, resource–constrained settings from 1950–2015. A total of 700 assessments, including 148 reports from other publicly available sources (mostly unpublished evaluation reports and books) met the criteria for inclusion and were reviewed using a data extraction form. Here we identify and categorize key strategies used in project implementation.ResultsSix categories of strategies for program implementation were identified, all of which required working in partnership with communities and health systems: (a) program design and evaluation, (b) community collaboration, (c) education for community–level staff, volunteers, beneficiaries and community members, (d) health systems strengthening, (e) use of community–level workers, and (f) intervention delivery. Four specific strategies for intervention delivery were identified: (a) recognition, referral, and (when possible) treatment of serious childhood illness by mothers and/or trained community agents, (b) routine systematic visitation of all homes, (c) facilitator–led participatory women’s groups, and (d) health service provision at outreach sites by mobile health teams.ConclusionsThe strategies identified here provide useful starting points for program design in strengthening the effectiveness of CBPHC for improving MNCH.

Community-based approaches are a critical foundation for many health outcomes, including reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH). Evidence is a vital part of strengthening that foundation, but largely focuses on the technical content of what must be done, rather than on how disparate community actors continuously interpret, implement and adapt interventions in dynamic and varied community health systems. We argue that efforts to strengthen evidence for community programmes must guard against the hubris of relying on a single approach or hierarchy of evidence for the range of research questions that arise when sustaining community programmes at scale. Moving forward we need a broader evidence agenda that better addresses the implementation realities influencing the scale and sustainability of community programmes and the partnerships underpinning them if future gains in community RMNCH are to be realised. This will require humility in understanding communities as social systems, the complexity of the interventions they engage with and the heterogeneity of evidence needs that address the implementation challenges faced. It also entails building common ground across epistemological word views to strengthen the robustness of implementation research by improving the use of conceptual frameworks, addressing uncertainty and fostering collaboration. Given the complexity of scaling up and sustaining community RMNCH, ensuring that evidence translates into action will require the ongoing brokering of relationships to support the human creativity, scepticism and scaffolding that together build layers of evidence, critical thinking and collaborative learning to effect change.

BackgroundWe summarize the findings of assessments of projects, programs, and research studies (collectively referred to as projects) included in a larger review of the effectiveness of community–based primary health care (CBPHC) in improving maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH). Findings on neonatal and child health are reported elsewhere in this series.MethodsWe searched PUBMED and other databases through December 2015, and included assessments that underwent data extraction. Data were analyzed to identify themes in interventions implemented, health outcomes, and strategies used in implementation.Results152 assessments met inclusion criteria. The majority of assessments were set in rural communities. 72% of assessments included 1–10 specific interventions aimed at improving maternal health. A total of 1298 discrete interventions were assessed. Outcome measures were grouped into five main categories: maternal mortality (19% of assessments); maternal morbidity (21%); antenatal care attendance (50%); attended delivery (66%) and facility delivery (69%), with many assessments reporting results on multiple indicators. 15 assessments reported maternal mortality as a primary outcome, and of the seven that performed statistical testing, six reported significant decreases. Seven assessments measured changes in maternal morbidity: postpartum hemorrhage, malaria or eclampsia. Of those, six reported significant decreases and one did not find a significant effect. Assessments of community–based interventions on antenatal care attendance, attended delivery and facility–based deliveries all showed a positive impact. The community–based strategies used to achieve these results often involved community collaboration, home visits, formation of participatory women’s groups, and provision of services by outreach teams from peripheral health facilities.ConclusionsThis comprehensive and systematic review provides evidence of the effectiveness of CBPHC in improving key indicators of maternal morbidity and mortality. Most projects combined community– and facility–based approaches, emphasizing potential added benefits from such holistic approaches. Community–based interventions will be an important component of a comprehensive approach to accelerate improvements in maternal health and to end preventable maternal deaths by 2030.

Background This is the sixth of our 11-paper supplement entitled “Community Health Workers at the Dawn of New Era”. Expectations of community health workers (CHWs) have expanded in recent years to encompass a wider array of services to numerous subpopulations, engage communities to collaborate with and to assist health systems in responding to complex and sometimes intensive threats. In this paper, we explore a set of key considerations for training of CHWs in response to their enhanced and changing roles and provide actionable recommendations based on current evidence and case examples for health systems leaders and other stakeholders to utilize. Methods We carried out a focused review of relevant literature. This review included particular attention to a 2014 book chapter on training of CHWs for large-scale programmes, a systematic review of reviews about CHWs, the 2018 WHO guideline for CHWs, and a 2020 compendium of 29 national CHW programmes. We summarized the findings of this latter work as they pertain to training. We incorporated the approach to training used by two exemplary national CHW programmes: for health extension workers in Ethiopia and shasthya shebikas in Bangladesh. Finally, we incorporated the extensive personal experiences of all the authors regarding issues in the training of CHWs. Results The paper explores three key themes: (1) professionalism, (2) quality and performance, and (3) scaling up. Professionalism: CHW tasks are expanding. As more CHWs become professionalized and highly skilled, there will still be a need for neighbourhood-level voluntary CHWs with a limited scope of work. Quality and performance: Training approaches covering relevant content and engaging CHWs with other related cadres are key to setting CHWs up to be well prepared. Strategies that have been recently integrated into training include technological tools and provision of additional knowledge; other strategies emphasize the ongoing value of long-standing approaches such as regular home visitation. Scale-up: Scaling up entails reaching more people and/or adding more complexity and quality to a programme serving a defined population. When CHW programmes expand, many aspects of health systems and the roles of other cadres of workers will need to adapt, due to task shifting and task sharing by CHWs. Conclusion Going forward, if CHW programmes are to reach their full potential, ongoing, up-to-date, professionalized training for CHWs that is integrated with training of other cadres and that is responsive to continued changes and emerging needs will be essential. Professionalized training will require ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the quality of training, continual updating of pre-service training, and ongoing in-service training—not only for the CHWs themselves but also for those with whom CHWs work, including communities, CHW supervisors, and other cadres of health professionals. Strong leadership, adequate funding, and attention to the needs of each cadre of CHWs can make this possible.

Background Evidence-based decision-making is crucial to leadership in the health sector to identify country-level priorities and generate solutions supported by rigorous research. Barriers and enablers have been explored, but limited evidence about what works to strengthening capacity at individual and institutional levels within countries has been reported, and inconsistent use of evidence to inform policy-making is a persistent challenge and concern. Methods We conducted a framework analysis comparing experiences of nine purposively selected countries (Chile, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Mozambique, Rwanda, South Africa and Sri Lanka). We utilised qualitative case studies developed by in-country teams to explore enablers and barriers described across components of a predefined theory of change and then identified six cross-cutting themes and recommendations for relevant stakeholders associated with each theme. Results The cross-cutting themes included (1) leadership and political will, (2) incentives and resources, (3) infrastructure and access to health data, (4) designated structures and processes, (5) interaction and relationships, and (6) capacity strengthening and engagement. While each case country’s context and experience was different, common enablers and barriers surfaced across each of these themes, with Ministries of Health and other government agencies having strong roles to play, but also recognising the need for other stakeholders, including researchers, donors and civil society, to serve as essential collaborators in order to strengthen evidence uptake. Substantial and sustained investment in research capacities, able leaders and stronger engagement of civil servants are needed to further this progress and strengthen processes of health decision-making. Conclusions All countries represented in this study have made commendable progress in increasing evidence uptake and strengthening supportive systems. Establishing and strengthening necessary structures and the relationships that underpin them takes time as well as resources. Going forward, the findings from this study can help guide and support advocacy to increase domestic funding for health research, especially health policy and systems research, and ensure that civil servants as well as researchers have the capacity and support to collaborate and continue to bolster evidence uptake.

BackgroundThe degree to which investments in health programs improve the health of the most disadvantaged segments of the population—where utilization of health services and health status is often the worst—is a growing concern throughout the world. Therefore, questions about the degree to which community–based primary health care (CBPHC) can or actually does improve utilization of health services and the health status of the most disadvantaged children in a population is an important one.MethodsUsing a database containing information about the assessment of 548 interventions, projects or programs (referred to collectively as projects) that used CBPHC to improve child health, we extracted evidence related to equity from a sub–set of 42 projects, identified through a multi–step process, that included an equity analysis. We organized our findings conceptually around a logical framework matrix.ResultsOur analysis indicates that these CBPHC projects, all of which implemented child health interventions, achieved equitable effects. The vast majority (87%) of the 82 equity measurements carried out and reported for these 42 projects demonstrated “pro–equitable” or “equitable” effects, meaning that the project’s equity indicator(s) improved to the same degree or more in the disadvantaged segments of the project population as in the more advantaged segments. Most (78%) of the all the measured equity effects were “pro–equitable,” meaning that the equity criterion improved more in the most disadvantaged segment of the project population than in the other segments of the population.ConclusionsBased on the observation that CBPHC projects commonly provide services that are readily accessible to the entire project population and that even often reach down to all households, such projects are inherently likely to be more equitable than projects that strengthen services only at facilities, where utilization diminishes greatly with one’s distance away. The decentralization of services and attention to and tracking of metrics across all phases of project implementation with attention to the underserved, as can be done in CBPHC projects, are important for reducing inequities in countries with a high burden of child mortality. Strengthening CBPHC is a necessary strategy for reducing inequities in child health and for achieving universal coverage of essential services for children.

BackgroundAs the number of deaths among children younger than 5 years of age continues to decline globally through programs to address the health of older infants, neonatal mortality is becoming an increasingly large proportion of under–5 deaths. Lack of access to safe delivery care, emergency obstetric care and postnatal care continue to be challenges for reducing neonatal mortality. This article reviews the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of community–based primary health care (CBPHC) and common components of programs aiming to improve health during the first 28 days of life.MethodsA database comprising evidence of the effectiveness of projects, programs and field research studies (referred to collectively as projects) in improving maternal, neonatal and child health through CBPHC has been assembled and described elsewhere in this series. From this larger database (N = 548), a subset was created from assessments specifically relating to newborn health (N = 93). Assessments were excluded if the primary project beneficiaries were more than 28 days of age, or if the assessment did not identify one of the following outcomes related to neonatal health: changes in knowledge about newborn illness, care seeking for newborn illness, utilization of postnatal care, nutritional status of neonates, neonatal morbidity, or neonatal mortality. Descriptive analyses were conducted based on study type and outcome variables. An equity assessment was also conducted on the articles included in the neonatal subset.ResultsThere is strong evidence that CBPHC can be effective in improving neonatal health, and we present information about the common characteristics shared by effective programs. For projects that reported on health outcomes, twice as many reported an improvement in neonatal health as did those that reported no effect; only one study demonstrated a negative effect. Of those with the strongest experimental study design, almost three–quarters reported beneficial neonatal health outcomes. Many of the neonatal projects assessed in our database utilized community health workers (CHWs), home visits, and participatory women’s groups. Several of the interventions used in these projects focused on health education (recognition of danger signs), and promotion of and support for exclusive breastfeeding (sometimes, but not always, including early breastfeeding). Almost all of the assessments that included a measurable equity component showed that CBPHC produced neonatal health benefits that favored the poorest segment of the project population. However, the studies were quite biased in geographic scope, with more than half conducted in South Asia, and many were pilot studies, rather than projects at scale.ConclusionsCBPHC can be effectively employed to improve neonatal health in high–mortality, resource–constrained settings. CBPHC is especially important for education and support for pregnant and postpartum mothers and for establishing community–facility linkages to facilitate referrals for obstetrical emergencies; howe...

Background. The Sustaining Technical and Analytical Resources (STAR) project seeks to invest in and expand the capacity of diverse senior global public health professionals. STAR builds on traditional work-based fellowships by partnering with universities in order to curate (or develop) and deliver high-quality, tailored learning across a set of required “core competency domains” as well as elective skills- or content-based competency domains. Pedagogy. In a rapidly changing global health context, ongoing learning is essential but often gets sidelined by other pressures; STAR’s approach aims to respond to these challenges by developing a learning curriculum tailored to the needs of our participants and their roles in global health. STAR’s pedagogy utilizes individualized learning plans, a deliberate practice approach, and a hybrid mentorship model to support project participants to achieve their learning objectives as well as broader project goals. Next Steps. The STAR project is in its first year of implementation. Furthermore, our future work will focus on developing a monitoring and evaluation plan that seeks to track the progress of our participants, guide project improvements, measure the impact of learning activities, and inform the pedagogy of future global health training initiatives.