ArticleBMJ global health2024
Use of Results-Oriented Monitoring tools to enhance global health accountability: lessons from the European Commission/WHO 'Health Systems Strengthening for Universal Health Coverage' programme.
Article in BMJ global health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Governments and organisations must demonstrate accountability and delivery of results. Results-Oriented Monitoring (ROM) is a European Commission mechanism aiming at enhancing internal control and management. The Health System Strengthening (HSS) for Universal Health Coverage (UHC) programme provides support towards achieving UHC through policy dialogue in 115 countries.Drawing from the ROM review of the HSS for UHC programme, we examine the value of the Commission's ROM system as a tool to enhance accountability of large Global Health (GH) programmes. We present the lessons learnt and provide specific recommendations about how ROM tools can be employed to strengthen GH accountability.ROM reviews can provide critical data to inform the design, implementation and evaluation of large-scale GH programmes through a well-integrated mixed-methods approach in which quantitative and qualitative components reinforce each other. Recognising the tremendous power of measures of performance, they track available quantitative indicators from baseline to target along the results chain. Firmly grounded on qualitative tools, they also capture the complex nature of health systems, and the critical influence of contextual factors and stakeholder dynamics.Poor data quality and insufficient multistakeholder engagement are persisting but not unsurmountable challenges. As increasing support is provided to strengthen health information and management systems, the process of codeveloping Monitoring and Evaluation frameworks at country level could serve as a tool to enhance mutistakeholder engagement in policy dialogue. The political nature of both results-oriented systems and GH programmes suggests that mechanisms to assess power dynamics should be incorporated into policy dialogues and ROM review processes.
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.