Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34187499›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2021

An analysis of policy and funding priorities of global actors regarding noncommunicable disease in low- and middle-income countries.

Kanykey Jailobaeva, Jennifer Falconer, Giulia Loffreda, Stella Arakelyan, Sophie Witter, Alastair Ager

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. [Evolution and Application of Disease Control Priorities].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. CARDIO4Cities: A roadmap for improving urban cardiovascular health.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Reorienting health systems towards Primary Health Care in South Asia.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024
    Review
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.

Kanykey JailobaevaInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK. kjailobaeva@qmu.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1316-8449
Jennifer FalconerInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.
Giulia LoffredaInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.
Stella ArakelyanInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.
Sophie WitterInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.
Alastair AgerInstitute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including mental health, have become a major concern in low- and middle-income countries. Despite increased attention to them over the past decade, progress toward addressing NCDs has been slow. A lack of bold policy commitments has been suggested as one of the contributors to limited progress in NCD prevention and management. However, the policies of key global actors (bilateral, multilateral, and not-for-profit organisations) have been understudied.

methodsThis study aimed to map the key global actors investing in action regarding NCDs and review their policies to examine the articulation of priorities regarding NCDs. Narrative synthesis of 70 documents and 31 policy papers was completed, and related to data collated from the Global Health Data Visualisation Tool.

resultsIn 2019 41% of development assistance for health committed to NCDs came from private philanthropies, while that for other global health priorities from this source was just 20%. Through a range of channels, bilateral donors were the other major source of NCD funding (contributing 41% of NCD funding). The UK and the US were the largest bilateral investors in NCDs, each contributing 8%. However, NCDs are still under-prioritised within bilateral portfolios - receiving just 0.48% of US funding and 1.66% of the UK. NGOs were the key channels of funding for NCDs, spending 48% of the funds from donors in 2019. The reviewed literature generally focused on NCD policies of WHO, with policies of multilateral and bilateral donors given limited attention. The analysis of policies indicated a limited prioritisation of NCDs in policy documents. NCDs are framed in the policies as a barrier to economic growth, poverty reduction, and health system sustainability. Bilateral donors prioritise prevention, while multilateral actors offer policy options for NCD prevention and care. Even where stated as a priority, however, funding allocations are not aligned.

conclusionThe growing threat of NCDs and their drivers are increasingly recognised. However, global actors' policy priorities and funding allocations need to align better to address these NCD threats. Given the level of their investment and engagement, more research is needed into the role of private philanthropies and NGOs in this area.

Indexed as

Noncommunicable DiseasesDeveloping CountriesGlobal HealthHealth PolicyHumansPolicy Makingand low and middle-income countriesfundingGlobal actorsnoncommunicable diseasespolicies

Identifiers

PMID34187499
PMCPMC8240078

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.