ArticleHealth policy and planning2019
Who is in and who is out? A qualitative analysis of stakeholder participation in priority setting for health in three districts in Uganda.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Community participation and stakeholder engagement in determining health service coverage: A systematic review and framework synthesis to assess effectiveness.Journal of global health · 2023Pooled it
- From continental strategy to country implementation: a document-based scorecard for assessing health security and sovereignty readiness in Africa.Global health action · 2026Article
- Inclusiveness of social participation for health reform: findings from a realist review.International journal for equity in health · 2026Review
- Participation in Continuing Professional Development Among Radiographers in Lilongwe District, Malawi.Journal of CME · 2026Article
- Operationalising Patient Engagement Through the Alberta Cancer Diagnosis Initiative: Recruitment Strategies for Diverse Populations in Health System Improvement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Development partner influence on domestic health financing contributions in Senegal: a mixed-methods case study.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Achieving universal coverage of childhood cancers in Ghana via the National Health Insurance Scheme: A stakeholder analysis.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Policy analysis of the Global Financing Facility in Uganda.Global health action · 2024Review
- Financing immunisation in Kenya: examining bottlenecks in health sector planning and budgeting at the decentralised level.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Using evidence from civil society in national and subnational health policy processes: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Health managers' perspectives of community health committees' participation in the annual health sector planning and budgeting process in a devolved unit in Kenya: a cross-sectional study.The Pan African medical journal · 2024Article
- Conditions for health system resilience in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Mauritania.BMJ global health · 2023Review
- How does power shape district health management team responsiveness to public feedback in low- and middle-income countries: an interpretive synthesis.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Participatory action research to address lack of safe water, a community-nominated health priority in rural South Africa.PloS one · 2023Article
- Priority setting for pandemic preparedness and response: A comparative analysis of COVID-19 pandemic plans in 12 countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.Health policy OPEN · 2022Review
- The political economy of priority-setting for health in South Sudan: a case study of the health pooled fund.International journal for equity in health · 2022Article
- Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans: a comparative analysis of 18 African countries.Health policy and planning · 2022Article
- Salient stakeholders: Using the salience stakeholder model to assess stakeholders' influence in healthcare priority setting.Health policy OPEN · 2021Article
- Estimating the cost of implementing a facility and community score card for maternal and newborn care service delivery in a rural district in Uganda.International journal for equity in health · 2021Article
- Collaboration between the government and nongovernmental organizations in providing health-care services: A systematic review of challenges.Journal of education and health promotion · 2021Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stakeholder participation is relevant in strengthening priority setting processes for health worldwide, since it allows for inclusion of alternative perspectives and values that can enhance the fairness, legitimacy and acceptability of decisions. Low-income countries operating within decentralized systems recognize the role played by sub-national administrative levels (such as districts) in healthcare priority setting. In Uganda, decentralization is a vehicle for facilitating stakeholder participation. Our objective was to examine district-level decision-makers' perspectives on the participation of different stakeholders, including challenges related to their participation. We further sought to understand the leverages that allow these stakeholders to influence priority setting processes. We used an interpretive description methodology involving qualitative interviews. A total of 27 district-level decision-makers from three districts in Uganda were interviewed. Respondents identified the following stakeholder groups: politicians, technical experts, donors, non-governmental organizations (NGO)/civil society organizations (CSO), cultural and traditional leaders, and the public. Politicians, technical experts and donors are the principal contributors to district-level priority setting and the public is largely excluded. The main leverages for politicians were control over the district budget and support of their electorate. Expertise was a cross-cutting leverage for technical experts, donors and NGO/CSOs, while financial and technical resources were leverages for donors and NGO/CSOs. Cultural and traditional leaders' leverages were cultural knowledge and influence over their followers. The public's leverage was indirect and exerted through electoral power. Respondents made no mention of participation for vulnerable groups. The public, particularly vulnerable groups, are left out of the priority setting process for health at the district. Conflicting priorities, interests and values are the main challenges facing stakeholders engaged in district-level priority setting. Our findings have important implications for understanding how different stakeholder groups shape the prioritization process and whether representation can be an effective mechanism for participation in health-system priority setting.
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.