ReviewBMJ global health2023
Decision-making processes for essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.
Review in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strengthening Primary Health Care for Improved Population Health and Health Equity in Somalia: A Narrative Review.Public health challenges · 2026Review
- Estimating investment costs to improve hypertension care in Lagos, Nigeria.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- A 10-Step Method for Fair Priority-Setting Processes: A Qualitative Case Study from Zanzibar.Health systems and reform · 2025Article
- Health service utilisation cost associated with residential fire incidents in New South Wales, Australia.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- An integrated framework to guide evidence-informed public health policymaking.Journal of public health policy · 2025Review
- Equity considerations for the implementation of health insurance benefit package in Ethiopia: result of expert Delphi exercise.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Challenges in institutionalizing evidence-informed priority setting for health service packages: a qualitative document and interview analysis from Iran.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Designing an evidence-informed package of essential health services for Universal Health Coverage: lessons learnt and challenges to implementation in Liberia.BMJ global health · 2024Article
- Priority setting and migration health policies for European countries.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Review
- Making development assistance work for Africa: from aid-dependent disease control to the new public health order.Health policy and planning · 2024Article
- The Use of Evidence to Design an Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan: A Review and Analysis of Prioritisation Decisions at Different Stages of the Appraisal Process.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Review
- The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Designing the Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- The hidden costs of universal health coverage: solutions from the fight against catastrophic healthcare expenditure in Thailand.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Building implementable packages for universal health coverage.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Essential packages of health services in low-income and lower-middle-income countries: what have we learnt?BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Enhancing Priority-Setting Decision-Making Process Through Use of Intersectionality for Public Participation.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Country readiness and prerequisites for successful design and transition to implementation of essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.BMJ global health · 2023Review
- The role of the private sector in delivering essential packages of health services: lessons from country experiences.BMJ global health · 2023Review
- Using costing to facilitate policy making towards Universal Health Coverage: findings and recommendations from country-level experiences.BMJ global health · 2023Review
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
Many countries around the world strive for universal health coverage, and an essential packages of health services (EPHS) is a central policy instrument for countries to achieve this. It defines the coverage of services that are made available, as well as the proportion of the costs that are covered from different financial schemes and who can receive these services. This paper reports on the development of an analytical framework on the decision-making process of EPHS revision, and the review of practices of six countries (Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and Zanzibar-Tanzania).The analytical framework distinguishes the practical organisation, fairness and institutionalisation of decision-making processes. The review shows that countries: (1) largely follow a similar practical stepwise process but differ in their implementation of some steps, such as the choice of decision criteria; (2) promote fairness in their EPHS process by involving a range of stakeholders, which in the case of Zanzibar included patients and community members; (3) are transparent in terms of at least some of the steps of their decision-making process and (4) in terms of institutionalisation, express a high degree of political will for ongoing EPHS revision with almost all countries having a designated governing institute for EPHS revision.We advise countries to organise meaningful stakeholder involvement and foster the transparency of the decision-making process, as these are key to fairness in decision-making. We also recommend countries to take steps towards the institutionalisation of their EPHS revision process.
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.