ArticleBMJ public health2024
Development of indicators to measure health system capacity for quality abortion care in 10 countries: a rapid assessment of a measurement framework and indicators.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring what matters: key indicators for performance and resilience in fragile, low-income contexts. A scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Measuring availability of and facility readiness to deliver comprehensive abortion care: experiences and lessons learnt from integrating abortion into WHO's health facility assessments.BMJ global health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: A significant gap exists in the availability of indicators and tools to monitor health system capacity for quality abortion care at input and process levels. In this paper, we describe the process and results of developing and assessing indicators to monitor health system capacity strengthening for quality abortion care. Methods: As part of a 4-year (2019-2022) multicountry project focused on preventing unsafe abortion using a health system strengthening approach in 10 countries, we developed a monitoring framework with indicators and metadata. Through an internal consultative process, we identified a structured list of operational health system capacity indicators for abortion. After implementing the indicators for baseline and annual project monitoring, project staff from 10 teams assessed each indicator using 4 criteria: validity, feasibility, usefulness and importance. Results: We identified 30 indicators aligning with 5 of the 6 WHO health system building blocks (excluding service delivery): 6 indicators in leadership and governance, 5 in health workforce, 6 in health information, 8 in access to medicines and health products and 5 in health financing. In our assessment of indicators, average scores against the predetermined criteria were lowest for feasibility (7.7 out of 10) compared with importance (8.5), usefulness (8.9) and validity (9.3). Assessors highlighted the need for fewer and less complex indicators, simplified language, clearer benchmarks, for indicators to be abortion-specific, less subjective and for future frameworks to also include service delivery and research and innovation. Conclusion: We used 30 indicators to monitor health system capacity for quality abortion care in 10 countries and gathered critical feedback that can be used to further strengthen the set of indicators in future work. Establishing core input and process indicators will be critical to inform and support evidence-based policy and programme improvements for quality abortion care.
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.