ArticleHealth policy and planning2022
Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans: a comparative analysis of 18 African countries.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring variation in research priorities generated by AI tools.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Disability inclusion in Zambia's government COVID-19 policies: a framework analysis.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Was priority setting considered in COVID-19 response planning? A global comparative analysis.Health policy OPEN · 2024Article
- Planning with a gender lens: A gender analysis of pandemic preparedness plans from eight countries in Africa.Health policy OPEN · 2024Article
- National COVID-19 preparedness and response plans: a global review from the perspective of services for maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health and older people.BMJ global health · 2024Review
- Observational
- A qualitative evaluation of priority-setting by the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel in Kenya.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Prioritisation processes for programme implementation and evaluation in public health: A scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Disability inclusion in African health systems' responses during COVID-19: A scoping review.African journal of disability · 2023Article
- Examining priority setting in the national COVID-19 pandemic plans: A case study from countries in the WHO- South-East Asia Region (WHO-SEARO).Health policy OPEN · 2022Article
- 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
- Human Respiratory Infections in Nigeria: Influenza and the Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.Vaccines · 2022Review
- Cash, COVID-19 and aid cuts: a mixed-method impact evaluation among South Sudanese refugees registered in Kiryandongo settlement, Uganda.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Identifying the impact of COVID-19 on health systems and lessons for future emergency preparedness: A stakeholder analysis in Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Essential health services delivery in South Africa during COVID-19: Community and healthcare worker perspectives.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Priority setting represents an even bigger challenge during public health emergencies than routine times. This is because such emergencies compete with routine programmes for the available health resources, strain health systems and shift health-care attention and resources towards containing the spread of the epidemic and treating those that fall seriously ill. This paper is part of a larger global study, the aim of which is to evaluate the degree to which national COVID-19 preparedness and response plans incorporated priority setting concepts. It provides important insights into what and how priority decisions were made in the context of a pandemic. Specifically, with a focus on a sample of 18 African countries' pandemic plans, the paper aims to: (1) explore the degree to which the documented priority setting processes adhere to established quality indicators of effective priority setting and (2) examine if there is a relationship between the number of quality indicators present in the pandemic plans and the country's economic context, health system and prior experiences with disease outbreaks. All the reviewed plans contained some aspects of expected priority setting processes but none of the national plans addressed all quality parameters. Most of the parameters were mentioned by less than 10 of the 18 country plans reviewed, and several plans identified one or two aspects of fair priority setting processes. Very few plans identified equity as a criterion for priority setting. Since the parameters are relevant to the quality of priority setting that is implemented during public health emergencies and most of the countries have pre-existing pandemic plans; it would be advisable that, for the future (if not already happening), countries consider priority setting as a critical part of their routine health emergency and disease outbreak plans. Such an approach would ensure that priority setting is integral to pandemic planning, response and recovery.
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.