Evaluating quality of obstetric care in low-resource settings: Building on the literature to design tailor-made evaluation instruments - an illustration in Burkina Faso

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are many instruments available freely for evaluating obstetric care quality in low-resource settings. However, this profusion can be confusing; moreover, evaluation instruments need to be adapted to local issues. In this article, we present tools we developed to guide the choice of instruments and describe how we used them in Burkina Faso to facilitate the participative development of a locally adapted instrument.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Based on a literature review, we developed two tools: a conceptual framework and an analysis grid of existing evaluation instruments. Subsequently, we facilitated several sessions with evaluation stakeholders in Burkina Faso. They used the tools to develop a locally adapted evaluation instrument that was subsequently tested in six healthcare facilities.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three outputs emerged from this process:</p> <p>1) A comprehensive conceptual framework for the quality of obstetric care, each component of which is a potential criterion for evaluation.</p> <p>2) A grid analyzing 37 instruments for evaluating the quality of obstetric care in low-resource settings. We highlight their key characteristics and describe how the grid can be used to prepare a new evaluation.</p> <p>3) An evaluation instrument adapted to Burkina Faso. We describe the experience of the Burkinabé stakeholders in developing this instrument using the conceptual framework and the analysis grid, while taking into account local realities.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This experience demonstrates how drawing upon existing instruments can inspire and rationalize the process of developing a new, tailor-made instrument. Two tools that came out of this experience can be useful to other teams: a conceptual framework for the quality of obstetric care and an analysis grid of existing evaluation instruments. These provide an easily accessible synthesis of the literature and are useful in integrating it with the context-specific knowledge of local actors, resulting in evaluation instruments that have both scientific and local legitimacy.</p

Doing Business and Inclusive Human Development in Sub-Saharan Africa

Purpose- This study examines how doing business affects inclusive human development in 48 sub-Saharan Africa for the period 2000-2012. Design/methodology/approach- The measurement of inclusive human development encompasses both absolute pro-poor and relative pro-poor concepts of inclusive development. Three doing business variables are used, namely: the number of start-up procedures required to register a business; time required to start a business; and time to prepare and pay taxes. The empirical evidence is based on Fixed Effects and Generalised Method of Moments regressions. Findings- The findings show that increasing constraints to the doing of business have a negative effect on inclusive human development. Originality/value- The study is timely and very relevant to the post-2015 Sustainable Development agenda for two fundamental reasons: (i) Exclusive development is a critical policy syndrome in Africa because about 50% of countries in the continent did not attain the MDG extreme poverty target despite enjoying more than two decades of growth resurgence. (ii) Growth in Africa is primarily driven by large extractive industries and with the population of the continent expected to double in about 30 years, scholarship on entrepreneurship for inclusive development is very welcome. This is essentially because studies have shown that the increase in unemployment (resulting from the underlying demographic change) would be accommodated by the private sector, not the public sector

Data Resource Profile: The Global Health and Population Project on Access to Care for Cardiometabolic Diseases (HPACC).

[No abstract available]ach STEPS survey is co-funded by the country’s government and the WHO. DHS are co-funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the respective country’s government. The funding of the other surveys are mostly co-funded by a country’s government, universities and international organizations, and sometimes supported by local sponsors. The creation of the final collated data set has been funded by the Harvard McLennan Family Fund and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation as well as institutional funds from the Universities of Heidelberg and Göttingen