Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34919565›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Innovations, contestations and fragilities of the health system response to COVID-19 in the Gauteng Province of South Africa.

Laetitia C Rispel, Carol Marshall, Busisiwe Matiwane, Immaculate Sabelile Tenza

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. When uncertainty becomes the norm: The Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital's Speech Therapy and Audiology Department's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2022
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laetitia C RispelCentre for Health Policy & South African Research Chairs Initiative (SARChI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of The Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-7806-6331
Carol MarshallSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of The Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Busisiwe MatiwaneCentre for Health Policy & South African Research Chairs Initiative (SARChI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of The Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4328-2285
Immaculate Sabelile TenzaCentre for Health Policy & South African Research Chairs Initiative (SARChI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of The Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-0286-9183
University of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGauteng province, with 26.3% of South Africa's population, is the commercial and industrial powerhouse of the country. During the first epidemic wave in 2020, Gauteng accounted for 32.0% of South Africa's reported COVID-19 cases.

aimThe aim of this study was to describe the health system response to the COVID-19 pandemic during the first epidemic wave in Gauteng province and to explore the perspectives of key informants on the provincial response. MATERIAL AND

methodsUsing an adapted Pandemic Emergency Response Conceptual Framework, this was a qualitative case study design consisting of 36 key informant interviews and a document analysis. We used thematic analysis to identify themes and sub-themes from the qualitative data.

resultsOur case study found that Gauteng developed an innovative, multi-sectoral and comprehensive provincial COVID-19 response that aimed to address the dual challenge of saving lives and the economy. However, the interviews revealed multiple perspectives, experiences, contestations and contradictions in the pandemic response. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and amplified the fragilities of existing systems, reflected in the corruption on personal protective equipment, poor data quality and inappropriate decisions on self-standing field hospitals. Rooted in a chronic under-investment and insufficient focus on the health workforce, the response failed to take into account or deal with their fears, and to incorporate strategies for psychosocial support, and safe working environments. The single-minded focus on COVID-19 exacerbated these fragilities, resulting in a de facto health system lockdown and reported collateral damage. The key informants identified missed opportunities to invest in primary health care, partner with communities and to include the private health sector in the pandemic response.

conclusionGauteng province should build on the innovations of the multi-sectoral response to the COVID-19 pandemic, while addressing the contested areas and health system fragilities.

Indexed as

PandemicsAdultCOVID-19FemaleGovernment ProgramsHumansMalePrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchSouth AfricaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34919565
PMCPMC8682886
OpenAlexW4200155449

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.