ArticlePublic health2014
WHO: retirement or reinvention?
Article in Public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- When the messenger is more important than the message: an experimental study of evidence use in francophone Africa.Health research policy and systems · 2022Trial
- Post-COVID-19 WHO Reform: Ethical Considerations.Public health ethics · 2021Article
- The financial sustainability of the World Health Organization and the political economy of global health governance: a review of funding proposals.Globalization and health · 2018Review
- The Ebola Outbreak: Catalyzing a "Shift" in Global Health Governance?BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- A political economy analysis of human resources for health (HRH) in Africa.Human resources for health · 2016Article
- Conceptual and institutional gaps: understanding how the WHO can become a more effective cross-sectoral collaborator.Globalization and health · 2015Article
- Proposing a sequential comparative analysis for assessing multilateral health agency transformation and sustainable capacity: exploring the advantages of institutional theory.Globalization and health · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
WHO reform has become a perennial subject of debate that has seen familiar issues raised time and again by incumbent director-generals and member states. This paper begins by reflecting on the distinct nature of WHO reform debates since the 1990s and the global factors behind the pressures to change. It then argues for a shift in focus, from fixing a single UN organization, to the collective health needs of a rapidly globalizing world. The achievement of effective global health governance will require more fundamental changes, beginning with recognition of the shared responsibility for reform. The challenge in the twenty first century will require an even greater willingness to delegate authority and resources to a supranational entity. The compromise may be that the mandate and powers of a global health organization may need to be more carefully circumscribed, but more meaningful in terms of effectively delivering the essential functions needed to protect and promote health in a globalized world.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.