Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36455987›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2022

Beyond political will: unpacking the drivers of (non) health reforms in sub-Saharan Africa.

Alison T Mhazo, Charles Chiedza Maponga

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

2 authors.

Alison T MhazoCommunity Health Sciences Unit (CHSU), Ministry of Health, Lilongwe, Malawi alisonmhazo@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2885-4713
Charles Chiedza MapongaPharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLack of political will is frequently invoked as a rhetorical tool to explain the gap between commitment and action for health reforms in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, the concept remains vague, ill defined and risks being used as a scapegoat to actually examine what shapes reforms in a given context, and what to do about it. This study sought to go beyond the rhetoric of political will to gain a deeper understanding of what drives health reforms in SSA.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley (2005) to understand the drivers of health reforms in SSA.

resultsWe reviewed 84 published papers that focused on the politics of health reforms in SSA covering the period 2002-2022. Out of these, more than half of the papers covered aspects related to health financing, HIV/AIDS and maternal health with a dominant focus on policy agenda setting and formulation. We found that health reforms in SSA are influenced by six; often interconnected drivers namely (1) the distribution of costs and benefits arising from policy reforms; (2) the form and expression of power among actors; (3) the desire to win or stay in government; (4) political ideologies; (5) elite interests and (6) policy diffusion.

conclusionPolitical will is relevant but insufficient to drive health reform in SSA. A framework of differential reform politics that considers how the power and beliefs of policy elites is likely to shape policies within a given context can be useful in guiding future policy analysis.

Indexed as

GovernmentHealth Care ReformAfrica South of the SaharaFemaleHumansMaternal HealthPolicyHealth policyHealth systemsReview

Identifiers

PMID36455987
PMCPMC9717331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.