RESEARCH Open Access

Application of machine learning models inpredicting length of stay among healthcareworkers in underserved communities inSouth AfricaSangiwe Moyo1,3* , Tuan Nguyen Doan1,2, Jessica Ann Yun3 and Ndumiso Tshuma3

Abstract

Background: Human resource planning in healthcare can employ machine learning to effectively predict length ofstay of recruited health workers who are stationed in rural areas. While prior studies have identified a number ofdemographic factors related to general health practitioners’ decision to stay in public health practice, recruitmentagencies have no validated methods to predict how long these health workers will commit to their placement.We aim to use machine learning methods to predict health professional’s length of practice in the rural publichealthcare sector based on their demographic information.

Methods: Recruitment and retention data from Africa Health Placements was used to develop machine-learningmodels to predict health workers’ length of practice. A cross-validation technique was used to validate the models, andto evaluate which model performs better, based on their respective aggregated error rates of prediction. Lengthof stay was categorized into four groups for classification (less than 1 year, less than 2 years, less than 3 years, andmore than 3 years). R, a statistical computing language, was used to train three machine learning models andapply 10-fold cross validation techniques in order to attain evaluative statistics.

Results: The three models attain almost identical results, with negligible difference in accuracy. The “best”-performing model (Multinomial logistic classifier) achieved a 47.34% [SD 1.63] classification accuracy while thedecision tree model achieved an almost comparable 45.82% [SD 1.69]. The three models achieved an averageAUC of approximately 0.66 suggesting sufficient predictive signal at the four categorical variables selected.

Conclusions: Machine-learning models give us a demonstrably effective tool to predict the recruited healthworkers’ length of practice. These models can be adapted in future studies to incorporate other informationbeside demographic details such as information about placement location and income. Beyond the scope ofpredicting length of practice, this modelling technique will also allow strategic planning and optimization ofpublic healthcare recruitment.

Keywords: Machine learning, Artificial intelligence, Health workers, Modeling, Staff retention

* Correspondence: [email protected] Health Placements, Rosebank, Johannesburg, South Africa3The Best Health Solutions, 107 Louis Botha Avenue, Orange Grove,Norwood, P.O. Box 92666, Johannesburg, South AfricaFull list of author information is available at the end of the article

© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, andreproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link tothe Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-018-0329-1

IntroductionThe lack of health workforce is a global crisis whichnumerous countries have proposed and implementedintervention plans [1, 2]. However, there is limited dataregarding the impact of these interventions and theirsustainability over a long period of time. Research showsthat the loss of healthcare workers in African countries(such as South Africa and Ghana) cripples the pre-exist-ing delicate health system [3, 4]. Hence, the retention ofhealth workers is essential for the healthcare system per-formance. These studies also point out that the recruit-ment of health workers should not only focus on nursesand physicians, but also on community health workers(CHWs) to help the primary healthcare systems boostthe coverage and address the basic health needs of soci-eties [4].Specifically, healthcare systems in sub-Saharan Africa

(SSA) face a serious human resource crisis, with recentestimates pointing to a shortfall of more than half amillion nurses and midwives needed to meet theMillennium Development Goals of improving thehealth and wellbeing of the SSA population by 2015 [5].One of the reasons for this phenomenon is due tohuman capital flight (“brain drain”) in the healthprofession, especially in the public sector [1, 6]. Migra-tion of health workers from low- and middle-incomecountries (LMICs) to high-income countries is a con-troversial aspect of globalization, having attracted con-siderable attention in health policy discourse at boththe technical and political levels [1, 7–9]. The migra-tion of skilled healthcare workforce translates into adirect loss of considerable resources to the publicsector of LMICs, as direct benefits only accrue to coun-tries, which have not invested in educating youngprofessionals. To make matters worse, in many sub-Sa-haran countries such as Sierra Leone and South Africa,there are limited alternatives for the population to seekhealthcare services from the private sector or nexthealth facility due to inaccessible distance or cost factor[10].To maintain a functional health system, most coun-

tries have altered their retirement age in order toextend the working life of their staffs. Furthermore,Botswana and South Africa have recruited from othercountries within and outside the continent [7]. Despitevarious local and international frameworks, the effect-iveness of these interventions is yet to be seen [7, 8].Another challenge lies in the monitoring and evalu-ation of these frameworks. Recent cross-sectionalreviews of currently available healthcare workforcedatabase show that in most cases, the systems arefragmented, unreliable, and cannot be integrated atboth national and international levels, and that inorder for policy-makers to make data-driven decisions,

better database management systems still need to bedeveloped [1, 2, 8].A high turnover rate in the health workforce is another

concern as it is costly and detrimental to organizationalperformance and quality of care. Healthcare organizationswith high attrition rate not only face issues with the qual-ity, consistency and stability of services provided to peoplein need, but also issues regarding the working conditionsof the remaining staffs such as increased workloads,disrupted team cohesion and decreased morale [11, 12].Some studies have focused on the influence of individ-

ual and organizational factors on an employee’s intentionto leave [13]. A World Health Organization (WHO)study of four African countries shows that the majorreasons behind health worker migration are better sal-ary, safer environment, living conditions, lack of facil-ities, lack of promotion, and heavy workloads [8]. Otherstudies conclude that better compensation package withgood work-life balance is the primary reason to migrate[6, 14, 15]. On the other hand, one of the obstacles tomigration is language barrier, which lies at the basis ofpatient care [16, 17]. Patients express their distress bydescribing their symptoms and pain and report changesin health status to professionals. Nurses or doctors needthe current and technical language fluency to communi-cate under stress and duress with one another, membersof the teams, and patient families [6].Another healthcare policy concern is the misdistribution

of healthcare workforce between urban and rural areas. Itprevents equitable access to health services, contributes toincreased health-care costs and underutilization of healthprofessional skills in urban areas, and remains a barrier touniversal health coverage [6].Overall, the human capital flight of local health pro-

fessionals, the high turnover rate, and the shortage ofworkers in the public sector of South Africa thusdemands further investment in attracting and retain-ing foreign healthcare staffs that stay for an extendedperiod of time. The WHO has also issued global rec-ommendations to improve the rural recruitment andretention of the health workforce [18]. This is pivotalto the delivery of healthcare in rural and remote areasof South Africa. A study has shown that 84% of SouthAfrican population uses public healthcare, served byonly 30% of the trained and certified doctors [19].Generally, sub-Saharan Africa faces severe lack ofhealthcare workers, with only 3% of the world’s totalmedical staff while facing 24% of the global burden ofdisease [8]. The arrival of foreign medical workforceand their placement in the public health sectorreduces the two-front misdistribution of physicians,alleviates the lack of human resources in public ruralfacilities, and improves access to healthcare to peoplein rural areas [8].

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 2 of 9

To date, greater efforts have focused on recruitment,with significantly less attention to workforce retention.As aforementioned, a challenge to improve health accessin rural areas is to maintain high retention rate of themedical workforce. Currently, there are few empiricalstudies regarding the factors that influence the length ofpractice [14, 17]. Previous attempts to identify these fac-tors mainly focus on worker satisfaction at medical facil-ities and retention strategy of staffing agencies [17].There are some recent research into the correlation be-tween employee demographic information and the suc-cess of retention effort in public health facilities [14].This paper aims to develop a predicting tool for the

length of practice of foreign healthcare workers, giventheir demographic information. Machine learningmethods are well-suited for this challenge. Rather thantraditionally considering the effect of demographic vari-ables on the length of practice one after another, machinelearning method examines all potential predictors simul-taneously in an unbiased manner, and identifies pattern ofinformation that are useful to make prediction.

MethodsStudy designA quantitative retrospective cohort study was conductedusing secondary data, collected from the Africa HealthPlacements (AHP).

Study settingSouth Africa Health, healthcare worker population inunderserved communities and distribution and retentionlevels. AHP recruits foreign and locally qualified healthprofessionals to be placed in underserved communitiesin South Africa. Underserved areas like rural areas oftenface challenges in recruiting and retaining healthworkers, government has responded with programmeslike compulsory community service and rural allowanceto address this challenge.

Data acquisitionLongitudinal individual health worker records are main-tained at AHP. These health workers included profes-sionals from South Africa and the rest of the worldseeking employment in underserved facilities in SouthAfrica. Data was collected using two methods (i) cus-tomized online portal completed by healthcare workers(HCW) and (ii) interviews by recruitment officersthrough email, Skype, and telephonic conversations.Data were captured onto a database and customer man-agement system called Docwize. The online portal isavailable at the AHP website as a contact form. Onceregistered, the HCW receives login details to completetheir application on Docwize. This system allows themto input personal and professional information, upload

certificates, which would then be verified with the re-spective regulatory authorities, and be informed aboutthe next steps until they secured a job offer. The HCWhave an option of completing the application online orsupplying the details to the recruitment officers whothen update the system. It takes an average of 18 monthsto complete the recruitment process, 75% of the HCWwere discouraged by the regulatory delays resulting inincomplete data. The length of stay was continuouslymonitored during their employment contract. Emailsand telephonic contact are used to establish their lastdate of employment at a particular facility.

Statistical analysisDataset description and manipulationWe took a complete cases approach, using only datafrom successfully recruited health workers withoutmissing observations. The Africa Health Placementsdataset contains 62 variables and 13 698 entries, inwhich there were 2079 successfully recruited practi-tioners. Among these 2079 professionals, some chosenot to provide personal information such as marital sta-tus or gender. After data cleaning, there were 1838entries with completed fields to meet the requirementsof this study.The variables that are used to develop our machine

learning models are chosen based on their availability inthe AHP data system. They are nationality, profession,relationship, and gender. Since there are a lot of missingvalues in our age variable dataset, a complete case ap-proach with age could have further reduced the datasetto merely 914 entries and undermine the ability of themodel to learn from existing data. Hence, we excluded itfrom the final analysis. Notably, all of our four predictorsare categorical variables. A challenge with having cat-egorical variables in machine learning is that to fully rep-resent each variable, we have to use a large number ofdummy variables to represent each level within the vari-able. For example, since our data had records from 145countries, we needed 144 dummy variables to representall existing countries. This method would result in a verysparse dataset and usually not useful in predictive mod-elling. Hence, we transcribed each variable as follows:

Nationality: categorical data of 145 different countries.Instead of recording nationality as it is, the nationalityvariable is transcribed based on World Bank’s classificationof countries into 4 categories: low income, lower middleincome, upper middle income, and high income.Professions: categorical data of 22 different registeredprofessions, recorded into 3 different categories: doctor,nurse, and otherGender: categorical data of 2 levels: male and female

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 3 of 9

Relationship status: categorical data of 3 levels: married,single, or other.

Machine learning model developmentWith a large recruitment and retention dataset fromAHP, we built three machine learning predictive modelsusing relevant demographic data. We evaluated themodels’ performance by doing 10-fold cross-validation.The aim was to choose a model that performs signifi-cantly better in predicting length of practice.As shown on Table 1, three different machine learning

classification models (multinomial logistic regression,decision tree, and Naive Bayes Classification) were usedto train the dataset. The issue was approached as aclassification, rather than a regression problem, as weaimed to classify a successful recruit into one of the fourmutually exclusive groups (less than 1 year, less than 2years, less than 3 years, and more than 3 years). The useof a regression method is not optimal in this case, dueto (i) the lack of quantitative numerical variables in ourdemographic information, (ii) the wide range of value ofthe dependent variables (length of practice measured indays), and (iii) the non-continuous nature of thedependent variables. A regression method would requirea much larger dataset to arrive at a model of relativelyacceptable fit. With our current available dataset, theexperimental fit is approximately 18% with high internalsum of squares. Moreover, in strategic workforce plan-ning, a precise prediction of the length of practice indays (or months) is generally not expected. A predictionof whether a specific healthcare worker will stay for 1year, 2 years, or longer is usually acceptable for mostintents and purposes.

Cross-validationTo decide which of the three models perform best, wehave to see their ability to generalize and predict new,unseen data. A challenge to our research was the lack oftest data which we could have used for model evalu-ation. Conventionally splitting our existing data into a80/20 ratio—80% of the data for training and 20% for

testing—was an option, but not optimal as we wanted touse all data available for training.We examined our three models with a technique

called 10-fold cross-validation. Ten-fold cross-validationworks as follows: we randomly partition the originaldataset into 10 disjoint subsets, use nine of those subsetsin the training process, make predictions about theremaining subset, and record the misclassification error.To avoid opportune data splits, we average misclassifica-tion error across the 10 folds. A comparison betweenthe average misclassification errors of the three machinelearning models allowed us to decide which model per-forms best on unseen data.

ResultsThree machine learning models were trained, and a10-fold cross validation technique was used to attainevaluative statistics. The three models attain almost identi-cal results, with negligible difference in accuracy. The“best”-performing model (multinomial logistic classifier)achieves a 47.34% [SD 1.63] while the decision tree modelachieves an almost comparable 45.82% [SD 1.69](Table 1).Multiclass area under the curve (AUC) was computed

by building multiple receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves (one class versus another) and taking theaverage, as defined by Hand and Till [20]. The threemodels achieve an average AUC of 0.66 (multinomial lo-gistic at 0.6652, decision tree 0.6635, Naive Bayes0.6602), suggesting sufficient predictive signal at the fourselected categorical variables.Overall, the three models had significant accuracy

in classifying the length of stay of healthcare workers(p value < 2.2e−16) (Table 1). Additionally, Kappastatistics was also computed, in order to measurehow much better each of the classifiers is performingover the performance of a classifier that simplyguesses at random according to the frequency of eachclass [21]. The Cohen’s Kappa statistics of the multi-nomial logistics, decision tree, and Naive Bayes are0.2658, 0.2649, and 0.2521 respectively, suggesting a

Table 1 Machine learning results

Techniques

Multinomial logistic Decision tree Naive Bayes

Accuracy 47.34% [1.63] 45.82% [1.69] 47.01% [1.62]

95% CI (46.22, 50.84) (46.66, 51.28) (45.19, 49.81)

AUC 0.6652 0.6635 0.6602

No information rate [NIR] 0.376 0.376 0.376

P value [Acc > NIR] < 2.2e−16 < 2.2e−16 < 2.2e−16

Cohen’s Kappa 0.2658 0.2649 0.2521

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 4 of 9

fair (but not substantial) agreement between predic-tion and response adjusted by the amount of agree-ment expected by chance.All three models perform reasonably well at identifying

those who are likely to stay for less than 1 year (Table 2).The sensitivity of this class was greater than 75% for allthree models, showing that they correctly identify morethan ¾ of those who are likely to stay less than 1 year.Specificity of this class is not particularly high (all lowerthan 65%), so all three models do not do as well in iden-tifying those who are staying for more than 1 year. How-ever, with a negative positive rate as high as 84% acrossthe three techniques, it means that when the modelnegatively classifies a person out of those who stay forless than 1 year, such classification is likely to be correct.In contrast, all three models perform poorly at identi-

fying those who are staying between 2 and 3 years(Table 2). With sensitivity at as low as 0% (decision tree)and specificity up to 100%, the three models must havelearned to negatively assign a majority (all in decisiontree case) out of this class. This is likely the result ofimbalanced data sample with too little sample data ofthis class (Fig. 1).

Comprehensive data analysisIn general, more males (997, 54%) than females (861,46%) were recruited (Table 3). Males stay on average187.78 days more than females do. South Africa hassupplied the greatest number of health workers (381,41%), followed by the United Kingdom (361, 39%),

Nigeria (106, 11%), and Netherlands (86, 9%) (Table 3).Doctors (1538, 83%) were the most recruited healthworkers and then nurses (107, 6%) and other profes-sionals (193, 10%). With regard to relationship status,single healthcare workers constituted 61% of therecruited, 31% were married, and 8% were cohabiting(Table 3, Figs. 1, 2, and 3).Figure 4 shows two world heat maps that represent (a)

the number of successful recruits from each country and(b) the average length of practice among those in thesecountries. The two maps point to an observation: AHPas a health placement organization is not very successfulin recruiting from some countries, e.g. Russia, but oncewe do, the recruits tend to stay for an extended periodof time. However, the sample size casts some doubts onthis observation. Some countries have very high averagelength of stay, simply because we have a very small sam-ple size of them.

DiscussionThis research shows that a majority of foreign qualifiedhealthcare workers (1497 out of 1838, 81%) stay at theirplacement facilities for less than 3 years. While a con-stant rate of foreign recruitment per year can “fill thegap” in paper, the low average length of practice signifiesa hidden cost of recruiting, relocating, and training ofnew healthcare professionals. Effective workforce plan-ning from government or non-profit organizations, thus,requires a tool to predict the length of practice of in-coming health professionals.

Table 2 Predictions of length of stay across the three models

Less than 1 year Less than 2 years Less than 3 years More than 3 years

Multinomial logistic techniques

Sensitivity 0.7685 0.3248 0.0369 0.5425

Specificity 0.6548 0.8503 0.9766 0.7896

Positive predictive value 0.5728 0.4533 0.2340 0.3700

Negative predictive value 0.8244 0.7673 0.8398 0.8834

Balanced accuracy 0.7166 0.5876 0.5068 0.6661

Decision tree techniques

Sensitivity 0.7858 0.3740 0.000 0.4897

Specificity 0.6469 0.8075 1.000 0.8150

Positive predictive value 0.5728 0.4260 NaN 0.3761

Negative predictive value 0.8337 0.7716 0.8379 0.8751

Balanced accuracy 0.7164 0.5908 0.5000 0.6524

Naive Bayes techniques

Sensitivity 0.7728 0.2658 0.0403 0.5630

Specificity 0.6391 0.8752 0.9760 0.7675

Positive predictive value 0.5633 0.4485 0.2449 0.3556

Negative predictive value 0.8236 0.7573 0.8401 0.8852

Balanced accuracy 0.7059 0.5704 0.5081 0.6653

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 5 of 9

Fig. 1 Number of subjects categorized by (from left to right, up to down) length of practice, professions, relationships, and countries

Table 3 Length of stay by gender, nationality, profession, and relationship status

Mean length of stay (days) Standard deviation (sd) Sample (n) Percentage (%)

Gender

Female 603.48 499.0 861 46

Male 791.26 630.9 997 54

Total 1 838 100

Nationality (top 4)

South Africa 548.65 388.1 381 41

United Kingdom 475.11 373.3 361 39

Nigeria 1 096.09 719.7 106 11

Netherlands 753.36 532.7 86 9

Registered profession

Doctor 714.58 588.4 1 538 83

Nurse 575.38 498.2 107 6

Other supporting staff 684.31 550.9 193 10

Total 1 838 100

Relationship status

Single 625.22 530.64 1 114 61

Married 868.46 659.26 574 31

Other 651.12 651.12 150 8

Total 1 838 100

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 6 of 9

The three models attain significantly above chanceresults, with the average AUC of approximately 0.66 (multi-nomial logistic at 0.6652, decision tree at 0.6635, NaiveBayes at 0.6602), suggesting sufficient predictive signal atthe four categorical variables selected. This is an indicationthat applying and retraining machine learning models withavailable datasets, Human Resource for Health decision

makers can effectively source healthcare workers who aremost likely to stay the longest in underserved communities.Machine learning must be applied together with other

qualitative methods like exit interviews so as to give anin-depth understanding of the healthcare worker per-ceptions and experiences that relate to their length ofstay. A mixed method would have generated a better

Fig. 2 Length of stay as function of relationship, colour by gender and grid by income group

Fig. 3 Decision tree on income, gender and profession

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 7 of 9

understanding of why certain gender, countries, age,and experience tend to stay longer than others.

Limitations of the studyIncomplete fields in the data were another issue as manycandidates were excluded from the study due to missinginformation. We could not obtain age as one of the pre-dictors, although we recognized that it could potentiallyinfluence health worker long-term plan to stay. Ourissue with incomplete data relates directly to the inef-fective database system issue that is common among thepublic sector in South Africa [1, 2, 8]. Although in theshort run, installing and enabling a more effective

database system imposes a cost challenge to healthcarenon-profits and public sector, such system is likely tomake tremendous impacts as the machine learningmodels can be further improved by learning from a lar-ger, high-quality dataset. In the meantime, there is a po-tential for the public sectors and NGOs to collaborateand involve in data sharing that could empower thetraining process of machine learning algorithms.

ConclusionsMachine learning models give us an effective tool to pre-dict the recruited health workers’ length of practice. Thesemodels can be adapted beyond the scope of demographic

Fig. 4 Map showing world distribution of a number of candidates sourced from each country and b average length of practice by thesecandidates from each respective country

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 8 of 9

information (i.e. information about placement location, in-come), allowing strategic planning and optimization ofpublic healthcare recruitment.

AbbreviationsAUC: Area under the curve; HCW: Healthcare workers; LMIC: Low- and middle-income countries; NGO: Non-governmental organization; ROC: Receiver operatingcharacteristic; SSA: Sub-Saharan Africa; WHO: World Health Organization

AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank the African Health Placement for providingthe dataset used in the study.

FundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in thepublic, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Availability of data and materialsThe dataset supporting the conclusions of this manuscript is available withthe corresponding author and will be made available in an anonymizedversion on reasonable request.

Authors’ contributionsAll authors contributed toward conceptualization, data analysis, drafting, andcritically revising the paper and agree to be accountable for all aspects ofthe work. All authors also read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participatePermission to conduct the study was obtained from Africa Health Placements.The researchers followed the highest standards to protect confidentiality andanonymity of subject data. All identifying information of individual subjectssuch as name, address and date of birth were removed from the dataset priorto the study.

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s NoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in publishedmaps and institutional affiliations.

Author details1Africa Health Placements, Rosebank, Johannesburg, South Africa. 2YaleUniversity, New Haven, CT, United States of America. 3The Best HealthSolutions, 107 Louis Botha Avenue, Orange Grove, Norwood, P.O. Box 92666,Johannesburg, South Africa.

Received: 15 December 2017 Accepted: 30 October 2018

References1. Bangdiwala IS, Fonn S, Okoye O, Tollman S. Workforce resources for health

in developing countries. Public Heal Rev. 2010;32(1):296–318.2. Viscomi M, Larkins S, Sen Gupta T. Recruitment and retention of general

practitioners in rural Canada and Australia: a review of the literature. Can JRural Med. 2013;18(1):13–24.

3. Tshuma N, Mosikare O, Alaba OA, Muloongo K, Nyasulu PS. Acceptability ofcommunity-based adherence clubs among health facility staff in SouthAfrica: a qualitative study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:1523–31.https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.s116826.

4. Agyepong IA, Anafi P, Asiamah E, et al. Health worker (internal customer)satisfaction and motivation in the public sector in Ghana. Hum Resour Heal.2012;11(247). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-698X-12-25.

5. Delobelle P, Rawlinson JL, Ntuli S, Malatsi I, Decock R, Depoorter AM. Jobsatisfaction and turnover intent of primary healthcare nurses in rural SouthAfrica: a questionnaire survey. 2010:371–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05496.x.

6. Habte D, Dussault G, Dovlo D. Challenges confronting the health workforcein sub-Saharan Africa. World Hosp Heal Serv. 2004;40(2):23–6.

7. Dovlo D. The brain drain and retention of health professionals in Africa. In:A case study Prep a Reg Train Conf Improv Tert Educ sub-Saharan AfricaThings that Work; 2003. p. 23–5.

8. Hatcher AM, Onah M, Kornik S, Peacocke J, Reid S. Placement, support, andretention of health professionals: national, cross-sectional findings frommedical and dental community service officers in South Africa. Hum ResourHealth. 2014;12:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-12-14.

9. Cometto G, Tulenko K, Muula AS, Krech R. Health workforce brain drain:from denouncing the challenge to solving the problem. PLoS Med. 2013;10(9):10–2. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001514.

10. Mills A, Brugha R, Hanson K, McPake B. What can be done about the privatehealth sector in low-income countries? Bull World Health Organ. 2002;80:325–30.

11. Kok MC, Dieleman M, Taegtmeyer M, et al. Which intervention designfactors influence performance of community health workers in low- andmiddle-income countries? A systematic review. Health Policy Plan. 2014;30(9):1207–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czu126.

12. Rosenthal EL, Brownstein JN, Rush CH, et al. Community health workers:part of the solution. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1338–42. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0081.

13. Steinmetz S, De Vries DH, Tijdens KG. Should I stay or should I go? Theimpact of working time and wages on retention in the health workforce;2014. p. 1–12.

14. Ali Mohammed M, De Moraes A. Factors affecting employees’ jobsatisfaction in public hospitals: implications for recruitment and retention. JGen Manag. 2009;34(4):51–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/030630700903400404.

15. Labonté R, Sanders D, Mathole T, et al. Health worker migration from SouthAfrica: causes, consequences and policy responses. Hum Resour Health.2015;13(1):92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-015-0093-4.

16. Sieleunou I. Health worker migration and universal health care in sub-Saharan Africa. Pan Afr Med J. 2011;10:55.

17. George G, Gow J, Bachoo S. Understanding the factors influencing health-worker employment decisions in South Africa. Hum Resour Health. 2013;11(1):15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-11-15.

18. Buchan J, Couper ID, Tangcharoensathien V, et al. Early implementation ofWHO recommendations for the retention of health workers in remote andrural areas. Bull World Health Organ. 2013;91(11):834–40. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.13.119008.

19. NDoH. National Health Insurance; 2017.20. Hand DJ. A simple generalisation of the area under the ROC curve for

multiple class classification problems. Mach Learn. 2001;45:171–86.21. Landis JR, Koch GG. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in

the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers.Biometrics. 1977;33(2):363. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529786.

Moyo et al. Human Resources for Health (2018) 16:68 Page 9 of 9

BioMed Central publishes under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL). Underthe CCAL, authors retain copyright to the article but users are allowed to download, reprint,distribute and /or copy articles in BioMed Central journals, as long as the original work isproperly cited.