Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Nov 2;6(11):e011885.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011885.

How do community health committees contribute to capacity building for maternal and child health? A realist evaluation protocol

Brynne Gilmore  1 , Eilish McAuliffe  2 , Fiona Larkan  1 , Magnus Conteh  3 , Nicola Dunne  3 , Michele Gaudrault  4 , Henry Mollel  5 , Nazarius Mbona Tumwesigye  6 , Frédérique Vallières  1   7
Affiliations

How do community health committees contribute to capacity building for maternal and child health? A realist evaluation protocol

Brynne Gilmore et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: The proposed research is part of ongoing operations research within World Vision's Access: Infant and Maternal Health Programme. This study aims to identify key context features and underlying mechanisms through which community health committees build community capacity within the field of maternal and child health. This may help to improve programme implementation by providing contextually informed and explanatory findings for how community health committees work, what works best and for whom do they work for best for. Though frequently used within health programmes, little research is carried out on such committees' contribution to capacity building-a frequent goal or proposed outcome of these groups.

Methods and analysis: The scarce information that does exist often fails to explain 'how, why, and for whom' these committees work best. Since such groups typically operate within or as components of complex health interventions, they require a systems thinking approach and design, and thus so too does their evaluation. Using a mixed methods realist evaluation with intraprogramme case studies, this protocol details a proposed study on community health committees in rural Tanzania and Uganda to better understand underlying mechanisms through which these groups work (or do not) to build community capacity for maternal and child health. This research protocol follows the realist evaluation methodology of eliciting initial programme theories, to inform the field study design, which are detailed within. Thus far, the methodology of a realist evaluation has been well suited to the study of community health committees within these contexts. Implications for its use within these contexts are discussed within.

Ethics and dissemination: Institutional Review Boards and the appropriate research clearance bodies within Ireland, Uganda and Tanzania have approved this study. Planned dissemination activities include via academic and programme channels, as well as feedback to the communities in which this work occurs.

Keywords: community capacity building; community health committees; maternal and child health; operations research; realist evaluation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Outcome process model for AIM-Health (adapted from Van Belle et al 2010). AIM-Health, Access Infant and Maternal Health.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Realist evaluation cycle.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Initial programme theory of CHCs for MCH community capacity building. CHC, community health committee; MCH, maternal and child health.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization, Health and Welfare Canada, Association CPH. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion: Charte DOttawa pour la Promotion de la Sante. In: International Conference on Health Promotion: the move towards a new public health November 17–21, 1986 Ottawa, Canada, 1986.
    1. WHO. Strengthening the performance of community health workers in primary healthcare Report of a WHO Study Group. In: WHO Technical Report Series, No 780 Geneva: Edited by Organization WH, 1989.
    1. Feighery E, Rogers T. Building and Maintaining Effective Coalitions. Palo Alto, CA: Health Promotion Resource Center, Stanford Center for Research in Disease Prevention, 1990.
    1. Zakocs RC, Edwards EM. What explains community coalition effectiveness: a reivew of the literature. Am J Prev Med 2006;3:351–61. 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.12.004 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Butterfoss FD, Kegler MC. Towards a comprehensive understanding of community coalitions: moving from practice to theory. In: DiClemente RJ, Crosby RA, Kegler MC. Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research: strategies for improving public health. edn San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2002:157–93.

Publication types