ArticleBMJ open2022
Identifying priorities for research on financial risk protection to achieve universal health coverage: a scoping overview of reviews.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Assessing intervention effects on healthcare-related financial protection in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid evidence review.Health policy and planning · 2026Review
- Factors influencing financial protection of the elderly within the framework of universal health coverage: A scoping review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Review
- Progress and inequalities in financial risk protection toward universal health coverage: insights from Vietnam.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Identifying implementation science research and policy priorities to advance universal health coverage: a multi-country modified Delphi study.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Financial risk protection and Nigeria's journey towards universal health coverage.npj health systems · 2025Review
- Exploring the facilitators and barriers to achieving universal health coverage in Uganda: a qualitative study of the free healthcare policy.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Implementation science research priorities for Universal Health Coverage: methodological lessons from the design and implementation of a multicountry modified Delphi study.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Equity of financial protection for health in high-income countries: scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Oral Health Care Out-of-Pocket Costs and Financial Hardship: A Scoping Review.Journal of dental research · 2024Article
- An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the lived experience of people with multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2024Article
- Policy analysis of the protection of Iranian households against catastrophic health expenditures: a qualitative analysis.BMC health services research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesFinancial risk protection (FRP) is an indicator of the Sustainable Development Goal 3 universal health coverage (UHC) target. We sought to characterise what is known about FRP in the UHC context and to identify evidence gaps to prioritise in future research.
designScoping overview of reviews using the Arksey & O'Malley and Levac & Colquhoun framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL-Plus and PAIS Index were systematically searched for studies published between 1 January 1995 and 20 July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Records were screened by two independent reviewers in duplicate using the following criteria: (1) literature review; (2) focus on UHC achievement through FRP; (3) English or French language; (4) published after 1995 and (5) peer-reviewed. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers extracted data using a standard form and descriptive content analysis was performed to synthesise findings.
results50 studies were included. Most studies were systematic reviews focusing on low-income and middle-income countries. Study periods spanned 1990 and 2020. While FRP was recognised as a dimension of UHC, it was rarely defined as a concept. Out-of-pocket, catastrophic and impoverishing health expenditures were most commonly used to measure FRP. Pooling arrangements, expansion of insurance coverage and financial incentives were the main interventions for achieving FRP. Evidence gaps pertained to the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and equity implications of efforts aimed at increasing FRP. Methodological gaps related to trade-offs between single-country and multicountry analyses; lack of process evaluations; inadequate mixed-methods evidence, disaggregated by relevant characteristics; lack of comparable and standardised measurement and short follow-up periods.
conclusionsThis scoping overview of reviews characterised what is known about FRP as a UHC dimension and found evidence gaps related to the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and equity implications of FRP interventions. Theory-informed mixed-methods research using high-quality, longitudinal and disaggregated data is needed to address these objectives.
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.