ArticleBMC public health2014
Measuring the health systems impact of disease control programmes: a critical reflection on the WHO building blocks framework.
Article in BMC public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
110 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 175 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary health care networks and impacts in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Health policy and planning · 2026Pooled it
- Facilitators and barriers to blood and blood product accessibility and use in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2026Pooled it
- Health system readiness for non-communicable diseases at the primary care level: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Health systems constraints and facilitators of human papillomavirus immunization programmes in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.Health policy and planning · 2020Pooled it
- Assessment of Barriers and Facilitators to the Delivery of Care for Noncommunicable Diseases by Nonphysician Health Workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Analysis.JAMA network open · 2019Pooled it
- Health systems facilitators and barriers to the integration of HIV and chronic disease services: a systematic review.Health policy and planning · 2017Pooled it
- Visible expansion, fragile effective coverage: Using repeated eye health system assessments to interpret limited change in eye health outcomes in Sierra Leone, 2013-2025.Dialogues in health · 2026Article
- Article
- Political economy analysis of health: a scoping review of concepts, definitions, frameworks, outcomes, and applications.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Article
- "No data, no problem"? A critical reflection of health monitoring systems and equity during COVID-19 in Finland.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Healthcare Infrastructure and Resource Barriers to Preventing Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV in Ghana: Insights from a Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Key determinants of integrated health service delivery: lessons from a pilot study on HIV and non-communicable disease integration in Zambia.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- COVID-19 in Ghana-Using the health system framework to describe RISE-mitigation strategies for COVID-19 response and recovery in Ghana.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Integration of palliative care into South Africa's health system: A before and after implementation study.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2026Article
- FETP-to-system integration model: a health system resilience model in the Middle East and North Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Article
- Strengthening the Structure of Public Health: Suggesting the Incorporation of 'People' Component as the 'Seventh Block'.Annals of global health · 2026Review
- Challenges and Proposed Solutions for Optimizing the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Using the WHO Health System Building Blocks Framework: A Systematic Review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2026Review
- Article
50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe WHO health systems Building Blocks framework has become ubiquitous in health systems research. However, it was not developed as a research instrument, but rather to facilitate investments of resources in health systems. In this paper, we reflect on the advantages and limitations of using the framework in applied research, as experienced in three empirical vaccine studies we have undertaken. DISCUSSION: We argue that while the Building Blocks framework is valuable because of its simplicity and ability to provide a common language for researchers, it is not suitable for analysing dynamic, complex and inter-linked systems impacts. In our three studies, we found that the mechanical segmentation of effects by the WHO building blocks, without recognition of their interactions, hindered the understanding of impacts on systems as a whole. Other important limitations were the artificial equal weight given to each building block and the challenge in capturing longer term effects and opportunity costs. Another criticism is not of the framework per se, but rather how it is typically used, with a focus on the six building blocks to the neglect of the dynamic process and outcome aspects of health systems.We believe the framework would be improved by making three amendments: integrating the missing "demand" component; incorporating an overarching, holistic health systems viewpoint and including scope for interactions between components. If researchers choose to use the Building Blocks framework, we recommend that it be adapted to the specific study question and context, with formative research and piloting conducted in order to inform this adaptation. SUMMARY: As with frameworks in general, the WHO Building Blocks framework is valuable because it creates a common language and shared understanding. However, for applied research, it falls short of what is needed to holistically evaluate the impact of specific interventions on health systems. We propose that if researchers use the framework, it should be adapted and made context-specific.
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.