ArticleHealth services research2024
Financing community partnerships for health equity: Findings and insights from cross-sector professionals.
Article in Health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addressing Mental Health and Social Needs in Tandem to Promote Health Equity.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2024Review
- Financing community partnerships for health equity: Findings and insights from cross-sector professionals.Health services research · 2024Article
- The big picture for this special issue: The state of the field, article highlights, and a look into the future.Health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo enhance understanding of financial alignment challenges facing cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) pursuing health equity and offer insights to guide research and practice. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY
settingWe collected data through surveys and interviews with cross-sector professionals in 16 states, 2020-2021. STUDY
designWe surveyed 51 CSP leaders and received 26 responses. Following administration of the surveys to CSP leaders, we also conducted interviews with cross-sector professionals. The data are analyzed descriptively, comparatively, and qualitatively using thematic analysis. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsFor quantitative survey data, we compare partnership responses, differentiating perceived levels of alignment among partnerships certified by the Pathways Community HUB Institute (PCHI), partnerships interested in certification, and partnerships without connection to the PCHI® Model of care coordination. For interviews, we engaged CSP professionals and those who fund their work. Two research team members took notes for interviews, which were combined and made available for review by those interviewed. Data were analyzed independently by two team members who met to integrate, identify, and finalize thematic findings. PRINCIPAL
findingsOur work supports previous findings that financing is a challenge for CSPs, while also suggesting that PCHI-certified partnerships may perceive greater progress in financial alignment than others. We identify four major financial barriers: limited and competitive funding; state health service delivery structures; cultural and practice divides across healthcare, social service, and public health sectors; and needs for further evidence of cross-sector service impacts on client health and costs. We also offer a continuum of measures of financial sustainability progress and identify key issues relating to financial incentivization/accountability.
conclusionFindings suggest a need for public policy reviews and improvements to aid CSPs in addressing financial alignment challenges. We also offer a measurement framework and ideas to guide research and practice on financial alignment, based on empirical data.
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.