Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37641114›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2023

The Tunisian experience of participatory health governance: the Societal Dialogue for Health (a qualitative study).

Hela Ben Mesmia, Dheepa Rajan, Rim Bouhafa Chtioui, Kira Koch, Imen Jaouadi, Hala Aboutaleb, Sana De Courcelles, Louisa Atmani, Blanche Pujos, Ali Mtiraoui

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Hela Ben MesmiaFaculty of Medicine of Sousse, Research Laboratory "Quality of Care and Management of Health LR12ES03", Doctoral Commission "Health Sciences", University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia. hela.benmesmia@sante.tn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7263-8287
Dheepa RajanWorld Health Organization European Centre for Health Policy/European Observatory for Health Systems and Policies, Brussels, Belgium.
Rim Bouhafa ChtiouiIndependent UN Expert, Tunis, Tunisia.
Kira KochWorld Health Organization Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland.
Imen JaouadiHigh School of Business, Manouba University (ESCT), Manouba, Tunisia.
Hala AboutalebWorld Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, Cairo, Egypt.
Sana De CourcellesParis Institute of Political Science (Sciences Po), Paris, France.
Louisa AtmaniParis Institute of Political Science (Sciences Po), Paris, France.
Blanche PujosParis Institute of Political Science (Sciences Po), Paris, France.
Ali MtiraouiFaculty of Medicine of Sousse, Research Laboratory "Quality of Care and Management of Health LR12ES03", Doctoral Commission "Health Sciences", University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.
Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris · FRUniversity of Sousse · TNEuropean Observatory on Health Systems and Policies · BEManouba University · TNWorld Health Organization · CHWorld Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean · EG

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTunisia has been engaged in the Societal Dialogue (SD) for Health process since 2012, a participatory health governance process aimed at bringing in people's voice into health policy-making. Its first success was the recently released National Health Policy 2030. This paper aims to document the SD process and to bring out the lessons learned to inspire other countries.

methodsThis study was based essentially on a qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with citizen jury members and health experts that took place from May to September 2018. The qualitative analysis adopted an inductive-deductive approach according to a cross-matrix between the themes of the interview of the two groups of interviewees.

resultsThe qualitative analysis of the data highlighted that the Societal Dialogue created a health democracy dynamic with inclusive dialogue spaces for the population, communities, and civil society to participate in health system design. It constituted a multi-actor and multidisciplinary coordination platform to increase consensus building among actors. Initial government support and high levels of volunteer commitment allowed the process to achieve a certain level of sustainability. However, this process faced and still faces many challenges such as overreliance on volunteers; a crisis of trust; political instability and the lack of an effective communication strategy. These challenges negatively influence the policy uptake of recommendations made by the Societal Dialogue for Health.

conclusionThe Tunisian societal dialogue experience highlights both the successes and challenges of a structured participatory platform, as well as the effort and perseverance it takes to keep such a process functional and relevant. A key lesson from this study is that this model of participatory health governance eventually reaches a stage where population, community, and civil society participation needs to be more institutionalized within the government routine so that it can credibly feed into health policy review processes and inform decision-makers on a regular basis.

Indexed as

GovernmentHealth PolicyConsensusHumansPolicy MakingQualitative ResearchCitizens’ participationHealth democracyHealth governanceHealth policyHeath system reformParticipatory governanceSocietal dialogueUniversal Health Coverage

Identifiers

PMID37641114
PMCPMC10463380
OpenAlexW4386220393

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.