The predictive validity of the Living Goods selection tools for community health workers in Kenya: cohort study
Celia A Taylor1, Richard J Lilford2, Emily Wroe3
1Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. celia.taylor@warwick.ac.uk.
Background:
Ensuring that selection processes for Community Health Workers (CHWs) are effective is important due to the scale and scope of modern CHW programmes. However they are relatively understudied. While community involvement in selection should never be eliminated entirely, there are other complementary methods that could be used to help identify those most likely to be high-performing CHWs. This study evaluated the predictive validity of three written tests and two individual sections of a one-to-one interview used for selection into CHW posts in eight areas of Kenya.
Methods:
A cohort study of CHWs working for Living Goods in eight local areas of Kenya was undertaken. Data on the selection scores, post-training assessment scores and subsequent on-the-job performance (number of household and pregnancy registrations, number of child assessments, proportion of on-time follow-ups and value of goods sold) were obtained for 547 CHWs. Kendall's tau-b correlations between each selection score and performance outcome were calculated.
Results:
None of the correlations between selection scores and outcomes reached the 0.3 threshold of an "adequate" predictor of performance. Correlations were higher for the written components of the selection process compared to the interview components, with some small negative correlations found for the latter.
Conclusions:
If the measures of performance included in this study are considered critical, then further work to develop the CHW selection tools is required. This could include modifying the content of both tools or increasing the length of the written tests to make them more reliable, for if a test is not reliable then it cannot be valid. Other important outcomes not included in this study are retention in post and quality of care. Other CHW programme providers should consider evaluating their own selection tools in partnership with research teams.
More Related Videos
11:21Methodology for Establishing a Community-Wide Life Laboratory for Capturing Unobtrusive and Continuous Remote Activity and Health Data
Published on: July 27, 2018
10:21Author Spotlight: Streamlining Protein Target Prediction and Validation via Molecular Docking and CETSA
Published on: February 23, 2024
Related Concept Videos
What are Populations and Communities?
Reliability and Validity
Predicting Molecular Geometry
What is Natural Selection?
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
Data Validation
Key parameters for method validation include:
