ArticleRevista de saude publica2024
Challenges to implementing planning processes in Brazilian health regions.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo recognize elements that facilitated or hindered the PlanificaSUS implementation stages.
methodsA multiple case study was carried out in four pre-selected health regions in Brazil-Belo Jardim (PE), Fronteira Oeste (RS), Sul-Mato-Grossense (MT) and Valença (BA) using systemic arterial hypertension and maternal and child care as tracer conditions. Participant observation (in regional interagency commissions) and in-depth interviews with key informants from state and municipal management and primary health care and specialized outpatient care service professionals within the project were carried out in these four regions. Analysis was built according to political, technical-operational, and contextual dimensions.
resultsThe political dimension evinced that the regions found the project an opportunity to articulate states and municipalities and an important political bet to build networks and lines of care but that there remained much to be faced in the disputes related to building the Unified Health System (SUS). In the technical operational dimension, it is important to consider that primary health care stimulated a culture of local planning and favored traditional tools to organize and improve it, such as organizing registrations, agendas, and demands. However, centralized training and planning-inducing processes fail to always respond to local needs and can produce barriers to implementation.
conclusionsIt is worth considering the central and regional role of state managers in the commitment related to the project and the effect of mobilizing primary health care and expanding its power. There remains much to be faced in the disputes at stake in bullring SUS.
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.