ArticleBMC health services research2016
An exploratory study on equity in funding allocation for essential medicines and health supplies in Uganda's public sector.
Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using routine health information data for research in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Essential medicines out of reach: a cross-sectional study of community-level access in Eastern Uganda.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- A systematic scoping review of medicine availability and affordability in Africa.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Compliance of public health facilities with essential medicines and health supplies redistribution guidelines in Mbale district, Eastern Uganda: a mixed-methods study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Article
- The role of government agencies and other actors in influencing access to medicines in three East African countries.Health policy and planning · 2021Article
- The effects of medicines availability and stock-outs on household's utilization of healthcare services in Dodoma region, Tanzania.Health policy and planning · 2020Article
- Pharmaceutical system strengthening in Uganda: implementing a holistic, evidence-informed, long-term strategy.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo ascertain equity in financing for essential medicines and health supplies (EMHS) in Uganda, this paper explores the relationships among government funding allocations for EMHS, patient load, and medicines availability across facilities at different levels of care.
methodsWe collected data on EMHS allocations and availability of selected vital medicines from 43 purposively sampled hospitals and the highest level health centers (HC IV), 44 randomly selected lower-level health facilities (HC II, III), and from over 400 facility health information system records and National Medical Stores records. The data were analyzed to determine allocations per patient within and across levels of care and the effects of allocations on product availability.
resultsEMHS funding allocations per patient varied widely within facilities at the same level, and allocations per patient between levels overlapped considerably. For example, HC IV allocations per patient ranged from US$0.25 to US$2.14 (1:9 ratio of lowest to highest allocation), and over 75 % of HC IV facilities had the same or lower average allocation per patient than HC III facilities. Overall, 43 % of all the facilities had optimal stock levels, 27 % were understocked, and 30 % were overstocked. Using simulations, we reduced the ratio between the highest and lowest allocations per patient within a level of care to less than two and eliminated the overlap in allocation per patient between levels.
conclusionsInequity in EMHS allocation is demonstrated by the wide range of funding allocations per patient and the corresponding disparities in medicines availability. We show that using patient load to calculate EMHS allocations has the potential to improve equity significantly. However, more research in this area is urgently needed.
trial registrationThe article does not report any results of human participants. It is implemented in collaboration with the Uganda's Ministry of Health, Pharmacy Division.
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.