Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22649488›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Inclusion and human rights in health policies: comparative and benchmarking analysis of 51 policies from Malawi, Sudan, South Africa and Namibia.

Malcolm MacLachlan, Mutamad Amin, Hasheem Mannan, Shahla El Tayeb, Nafisa Bedri, Leslie Swartz, Alister Munthali, Gert Van Rooy, Joanne McVeigh

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Indigenous Health and Human Rights: A Reflection on Law and Culture.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Malcolm MacLachlanCentre for Global Health, School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. malcolm.maclachlan@tcd.ie
Mutamad Amin
Hasheem Mannan
Shahla El Tayeb
Nafisa Bedri
Leslie Swartz
Alister Munthali
Gert Van Rooy
Joanne McVeigh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While many health services strive to be equitable, accessible and inclusive, peoples' right to health often goes unrealized, particularly among vulnerable groups. The extent to which health policies explicitly seek to achieve such goals sets the policy context in which services are delivered and evaluated. An analytical framework was developed--EquiFrame--to evaluate 1) the extent to which 21 Core Concepts of human rights were addressed in policy documents, and 2) coverage of 12 Vulnerable Groups who might benefit from such policies. Using this framework, analysis of 51 policies across Malawi, Namibia, South Africa and Sudan, confirmed the relevance of all Core Concepts and Vulnerable Groups. Further, our analysis highlighted some very strong policies, serious shortcomings in others as well as country-specific patterns. If social inclusion and human rights do not underpin policy formation, it is unlikely they will be inculcated in service delivery. EquiFrame facilitates policy analysis and benchmarking, and provides a means for evaluating policy revision and development.

Indexed as

Health PolicyModels, TheoreticalBenchmarkingHuman RightsHumansMalawiNamibiaPolicy MakingSouth AfricaSudan

Identifiers

PMID22649488
PMCPMC3359320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.