Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33200071›Full record

ArticleAnnals of global health2020

Partnership and Participation-A Social Network Analysis of the 2017 Global Fund Application Process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda.

Katharine D Shelley, Carol Kamya, Godefroid Mpanya, Salva Mulongo, Shakilah N Nagasha, Emily Beylerian, Herbert C Duber, Bernardo Hernandez, Allison Osterman, David E Phillips and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Katharine D ShelleyPATH, Seattle, US.
Carol KamyaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration (IDRC), Kampala, UG.
Godefroid MpanyaPATH, Kinshasa, CD.
Salva MulongoPATH, Kinshasa, CD.
Shakilah N NagashaInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration (IDRC), Kampala, UG.
Emily BeylerianPATH, Seattle, US.
Herbert C DuberDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, US.
Bernardo HernandezDepartment of Health Metrics Sciences, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington, Seattle, US.
Allison OstermanPATH, Seattle, US.
David E PhillipsDepartment of Health Metrics Sciences, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington, Seattle, US.
Jessica C ShearerPATH, Seattle, US.
Global Fund Prospective Country Evaluation IHME/PATH consortium collaborators
Program for Appropriate Technology in Health · USInfectious Diseases Research Collaboration · UGInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was founded in 2002 as a public-private partnership between governments, the private sector, civil society, and populations affected by the three diseases. A key principle of the Global Fund is country ownership in accessing funding through "engagement of in-country stakeholders, including key and vulnerable populations, communities, and civil society." Research documenting whether diverse stakeholders are actually engaged and on how stakeholder engagement affects processes and outcomes of grant applications is limited. Objective: To examine representation during the 2017 Global Fund application process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Uganda and the benefits and drawbacks of partnership to the process. Methods: We developed a mixed-methods social network survey to measure network structure and assess perceptions of how working together in partnership with other individuals/organizations affected perceived effectiveness, efficiency, and country ownership of the application process. Surveys were administered from December 2017-May 2018, initially to a set of central actors, followed by any individuals named during the surveys (up to 10) as collaborators. Network analyses were conducted using R. Findings: Collaborators spanning many organizations and expertise areas contributed to the 2017 applications (DRC: 152 nodes, 237 ties; Uganda: 118 nodes, 241 ties). Participation from NGOs and civil society representatives was relatively strong, with most of their ties being to different organization types, Uganda (63%), and DRC (67%), highlighting their collaborative efforts across the network. Overall, the perceived benefits of partnership were high, including very strong ratings for effectiveness in both countries. Perceived drawbacks of partnership were minimal; however, less than half of respondents thought partnership helped reduce transaction costs or financial costs, suggesting an inclusive and participatory process may come with short-term efficiency tradeoffs. Conclusions: Social network analysis can be useful for identifying who is included and excluded from the process, which can support efforts to ensure stronger, more meaningful engagement in future Global Fund application processes.

Indexed as

Financial ManagementGlobal HealthDemocratic Republic of the CongoHumansSocial Network AnalysisUganda

Identifiers

PMID33200071
PMCPMC7646284
OpenAlexW3094920366

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.