Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39623409›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

The South African Competition Commission COVID-19 easing of competition rules for private healthcare to facilitate public-private interaction - a media content analysis.

Amina Abdullah, Thatohatsi Sefuthi, Mapato Ramokgopa, Sharon Fonn, Lungiswa Nkonki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Beyond skills: Reimagining clinical education for a transformative future.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
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

5 authors.

Amina AbdullahDepartment of Global Health, Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Thatohatsi SefuthiDepartment of Global Health, Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Mapato RamokgopaDepartment of Global Health, Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Sharon FonnSchool of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lungiswa NkonkiDepartment of Global Health, Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa. lnkonki@sun.ac.za.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFuture emergencies from climate degradation or diseases are likely, prompting ongoing investment in emergency readiness and learning from country responses. South Africa's healthcare system, divided into public and private sectors, required a coordinated, intersectoral response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A coordinated action that the South African government took was adapting competition regulations. The South African Department of Trade, Industry and Competition on 19 March 2020, published a block exemption (easing of competition rules) for healthcare to promote standardization of practices across the health sector and facilitate agreements between the National Department of Health and the private sector to ensure adequate service delivery to all South Africans.

methodsWe assessed how much coverage the block exemption for healthcare received in the media and if the scope included details of what the exemption meant, how stakeholders and the public could use it, and the resulting public sentiment. We conducted a media content analysis to select, screen and assess the media material. Online and social-media articles in the public domain from 19 March 2020 to 19 March 2021, in English were considered.

resultsWe analysed 22 online media articles that matched our inclusion criteria. Twenty of these reflected a positive sentiment, and two were negative. Media reported on the COVID-19 block exemption in healthcare only in the first three months of our study period. The articles primarily communicated what the block exemption meant, focusing on allowing collaboration, the purpose of the exemption, the activities granted under the exemption and the actors to whom it applied. It's estimated that these media articles could have been read by up to 432,003 people out of a total population of just under 43 million people over the age of 15 years.

conclusionIn times of crisis, the media has a significant responsibility to provide accurate information to the public. However, the accuracy and reliability of such information depends on the quality of official sources on which the media relies. Our research shows that very few media reports were available about the block exemption for healthcare. While the government implemented the exemption, it did not communicate its purpose directly to the public. Our research highlights the need for better communication between policymakers and the media.

Indexed as

COVID-19Delivery of Health CareEconomic CompetitionHumansMass MediaPandemicsPrivate SectorPublic-Private Sector PartnershipsSARS-CoV-2Social MediaSouth AfricaBlock exemptionCompetition policyContent analysisCOVID-19MediaPublic health emergency response and preparedness

Identifiers

PMID39623409
PMCPMC11613733

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.