ArticleBMJ global health2024
Advancing governance for digital transformation in health: insights from Georgia's experience.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is Digital Healthcare Better Than None? The Digital Health Technology Dilemma in Low-Income Countries.Asian bioethics review · 2026Article
- Automated Waitlists for Ambulatory Appointment Scheduling: Multisite, Mixed Methods Evaluation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Can innovation strengthen resilient, just and sustainable health systems in disaster-prone settings? Insights from HSR2024.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Building sustainable public health data science and informatics capacity: possibilities for Eastern Europe and Central Asia.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Digital maturity index instrument development for primary health care in Indonesia: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods approach.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Implementing a balanced scorecard-driven performance dashboard for governance in a public oncology centre in Morocco.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2026Article
- Governing AI-driven digital transformation in public healthcare: assessing administrative readiness and institutional capacity in Egypt's health system.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- African digital health strategic plans analysis: key weaknesses in contextualization, intervention focus, and technological foresight.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Digital health governance in China by a whole-of-society approach.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Reforming Uganda's digital health data systems: A policy analysis for inclusive, equitable, and decolonised data governance.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enhancing digital health governance is critical to healthcare systems in low-income and middle-income countries. However, implementing governance-enhancing reforms in these countries is often challenging due to the multiplicity of external players and insufficient operational guidance that is accessible. Using data from desktop research, in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and three stakeholder workshops, this paper aims to provide insights into Georgia's experience in advancing digital health governance reforms. It reveals how Georgia has progressed on this path by unpacking the general term 'governance' into operational domains, where stakeholders and involved institutions could easily relate their institutional and personal roles and responsibilities with the specific function needed for digital health. Based on this work, the country delineated institutional responsibilities and passed the necessary regulations to establish better governance arrangements for digital health. The Georgia experience provides practical insights into the challenges faced and solutions found for advancing digital health governance in a middle-income country setting. The paper highlights the usefulness of operational definitions for the digital health governance domains that helped (a) increase awareness among stakeholders about the identified domains and their meaning, (b) discuss possible governance and institutional arrangements relevant to a country context, and (c) design the digital health governance architecture that the government decreed. Finally, the paper offers a broad description of domains in which the governance arrangements could be considered and used for other settings where relevant. The paper points to the need for a comprehensive taxonomy for governance domains to better guide digital health governance enhancements in low-middle-income country settings.
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.