ArticleGlobal public health2019
The power of popular opinion in everyday primary care provision in urban India.
Article in Global public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning analysis of health system resilience.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Health System Resilience as the Basis for Explanation Versus Evaluation Comment on "The COVID-19 System Shock Framework: Capturing Health System Innovation During the COVID-19 Pandemic".International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Expressions of actor power in implementation: a qualitative case study of a health service intervention in South Africa.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Power and politics: the case for linking resilience to health system governance.BMJ global health · 2020Article
- Community perspectives on primary health centers in rural Maharashtra: What can we learn for policy?Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies of power in health care settings in low- and middle-income countries largely describe providers' exercise of discretionary power in frontline roles, leaving under-specified the macro-institutions and mechanisms of power that drive health care outcomes. In this study I conceptualise providers' actions not in terms of discretionary power but as obligatory responses to 'authority' over them. Authority denotes an actor's rightfully held social power over others, who accept to follow that actor's directives. Explaining authority's workings entails studying how it operates from its subjects' perspectives. I analyse in particular the authority of popular opinion-which derives from citizens' claims to state services-over primary care doctors in municipal health facilities in Pune, India. Through year-long ethnographic fieldwork, I examine doctors' experience of popular opinion, social relations between doctors and communities, and the institutional history of state-provided urban primary care. Findings show that doctors routinely confront popular disregard for their services. But under conditions of long-standing neglect of municipal services, tenuous state-society relations, and an avid, widely preferred private sector, doctors appear unable and wary to deliver more than minimum clinical care. Their circumscribed response reflects mechanisms by which the power of popular opinion, under policy neglect, impels them to maintain a deficient status quo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29695188What 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.