ReviewGHM open2022
Unfinished business: Lessons for future G20 meetings on a more inclusive understanding of universal health coverage.
Review in GHM open, 2022. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Group of 20 (G20) Osaka Summit in 2019 was a large step forward for global health diplomacy to build consensus on universal health coverage (UHC). To strengthen multi-stakeholder UHC partnership, Japan involved the research and policy advice network for G20 (Think 20: T20), civil society (Civil 20: C20), private initiatives of medical professional groups (H20), and the pharmaceutical sector. We attempted to identify UHC-related issues addressed and left unaddressed at the G20 Osaka, to bring lessons for future G20. We reviewed the G20 Osaka Leaders' Declaration, policy-related statements, and voices of the relevant G20 engagement groups and sectors. In July 2019, after the G20 Osaka Leaders' Summit, we organized an expert meeting convening Japan-based UHC-related key global health stakeholders. This review provides record of main findings presented in form of classifying the voices expressed in the meeting by UHC-related topics, and definitional ranges of UHC summarized. The T20, H20, and the pharmaceutical sector noted during our expert meeting that the ministerial-level health-finance collaboration was one of the key agendas suggested at the G20. T20 and C20 called for a recognition of health needs of refugees, migrants and other vulnerable groups in achieving UHC. Sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) with a human rights-based approach through UHC was raised by the C20 as an issue unaddressed in G20 Osaka. Variation in operative purposes between global health stakeholders led to a definitional difference in the scope of UHC. The definitional difference could delay progress of UHC attainment. Addressing migrant and refugee health and SRHR within the context of UHC is further needed. Understanding perspectives of various stakeholders will become increasingly important to well-coordinate multi-actor cooperation with adequate social responsibility and transparency in UHC achievement and public-private partnership. In future G20, for UHC in the COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic worlds there is need of
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.