ArticleRevista de saude publica2020
Health financing in Brazil and the goals of the 2030 Agenda: high risk of failure.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health resource mobilization: state or government policies?Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2026Article
- Litigation in access to universal health coverage for children and adolescents in Brazil.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Access to medicines, the Unified Health System, and intersectional injustices.Revista de saude publica · 2024Article
- Fiscal austerity and municipal health spending: an interrupted time series study.Revista de saude publica · 2024Article
- [Food and nutrition surveillance actions in Brazil and Portugal: a comparative documentary analysis].Cadernos de saude publica · 2024Article
- COVID-19, SDGs and public health systems: Linkages in Brazil.Health policy OPEN · 2023Article
- Differences in determinants of active aging between older Brazilian and English adults: ELSI-Brazil and ELSA.Cadernos de saude publica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the financing of the Unified Health System (SUS) from 2010 to 2019 and analyze the recent trends in the allocation of federal resources to large areas of operation of the system, as well as the possibility of achieving the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3 of the 2030 Agenda.
methodsData from the budgetary and financial execution of the federation entities were obtained. Transfers from the Brazilian Ministry of Health (MH) to the municipal and state departments and their direct applications were identified according to large final areas of SUS and middle areas. Basic descriptive statistics, graphs and tables were used to analyze the execution of expenses by these areas.
resultsPublic spending per capita on health increased between 2010 and 2018. However, compared to 2014, it reduced 3% in 2018. There was a displacement of the allocation of federal resources to the detriment of transfers to the states (-21%). There are also losses of health surveillance in favor of primary care and pharmaceuticals. In the case of primary care, the increase in spending was tied to changes in policy and the expansion of resources allocated by parliamentary amendments. In the case of pharmaceuticals, the increase was due to the incorporation of new drugs, including vaccines, judicialization, increased spending on blood products and centralization, in the MH, of the purchase of items of high budgetary impact.
conclusionIf there is no change in the current SUS financing framework, something unlikely under Constitutional Amendment No. 95, associated with the redefinition of health policy priorities, the risk of non-compliance with the SDG 3 of the Agenda 2030 is very high.
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.