Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30157887›Full record

ReviewGlobalization and health2018

Are health systems interventions gender blind? examining health system reconstruction in conflict affected states.

Valerie Percival, Esther Dusabe-Richards, Haja Wurie, Justine Namakula, Sarah Ssali, Sally Theobald

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Globalization and health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Towards an Explanation of the Social Value of Health Systems: An Interpretive Synthesis.International journal of health policy and management · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Valerie PercivalInternational Affairs, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University, 5319 Richcraft Building, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada. Valerie.percival@carleton.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9828-3376
Esther Dusabe-RichardsUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Haja WurieReBUILD Research Consortium, College of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences, University of Sierra Leone, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Justine NamakulaReBUILD Consortium, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Sarah SsaliSchool of Women and Gender Studies, ReBUILD consortium, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Sally TheobaldSocial Science and International Health, ReBUILD and RinGs Consortium, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal health policy prioritizes improving the health of women and girls, as evident in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), multiple women's health initiatives, and the billions of dollars spent by international donors and national governments to improve health service delivery in low-income countries. Countries recovering from fragility and conflict often engage in wide-ranging institutional reforms, including within the health system, to address inequities. Research and policy do not sufficiently explore how health system interventions contribute to the broader goal of gender equity.

methodsThis paper utilizes a framework synthesis approach to examine if and how rebuilding health systems affected gender equity in the post-conflict contexts of Mozambique, Timor Leste, Sierra Leone, and Northern Uganda. To undertake this analysis, we utilized the WHO health systems building blocks to establish benchmarks of gender equity. We then identified and evaluated a broad range of available evidence on these building blocks within these four contexts. We reviewed the evidence to assess if and how health interventions during the post-conflict reconstruction period met these gender equity benchmarks.

findingsOur analysis shows that the four countries did not meet gender equitable benchmarks in their health systems. Across all four contexts, health interventions did not adequately reflect on how gender norms are replicated by the health system, and conversely, how the health system can transform these gender norms and promote gender equity. Gender inequity undermined the ability of health systems to effectively improve health outcomes for women and girls. From our findings, we suggest the key attributes of gender equitable health systems to guide further research and policy.

conclusionThe use of gender equitable benchmarks provides important insights into how health system interventions in the post-conflict period neglected the role of the health system in addressing or perpetuating gender inequities. Given the frequent contact made by individuals with health services, and the important role of the health system within societies, this gender blind nature of health system engagement missed an important opportunity to contribute to more equitable and peaceful societies.

Indexed as

Health EquitySex FactorsDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMaleMozambiqueSierra LeoneTimor-LesteUgandaWarfareGender and developmentGender and healthHealth systemsPost-conflict

Identifiers

PMID30157887
PMCPMC6116483

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.