|
|
Volume
7: No. 6, November 2010
SPECIAL TOPIC
Improving Public Health System Performance Through Multi-Organizational Partnerships
| Type of Partnership Configuration (Breadth/Density/Centrality) |
Prevalence, %
(95% CI) |
| 1998 |
2006 |
| Comprehensive |
| Cluster 1 (High/High/Moderate) |
13 (9-17) |
21 (16-27) |
| Cluster 2 (High/High/Low) |
5 (2-8) |
3 (1-6) |
| Cluster 3 (High/Low/High) |
6 (3-9) |
12 (8-16) |
| Conventional |
| Cluster 4 (Moderate/Moderate/High) |
3 (1-5) |
3 (1-5) |
| Cluster 5 (Moderate/Moderate/Low) |
45 (39-52) |
31 (25-37) |
| Limited |
| Cluster 6 (Low/Low/High) |
14 (9-18) |
18 (13-23) |
| Cluster 7 (Low/Moderate/Low) |
14 (9-18) |
11 (7-15) |
Figure. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 7 public health partnership configurations, 1998 and 2006. Data were obtained from a survey of the 351 agencies that responded in both years
(29,30). Seven configurations were identified through multivariate cluster
analysis, each one distinguished by network breadth, density, and centrality.
Breadth represents the array of actors involved in the partnerships; density
represents the amount of interconnectedness between organizations; and
centrality represents the relative influence of a single organization within a
partnership.
Return to article
|
|
