ReviewHealth policy and planning2025
First referral hospitals in low-resource settings: a narrative review of expectations for clinical service provision.
Review in Health policy and planning, 2025. 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
First referral hospitals (FRHs) have an important role to play in helping many countries achieve 'Health for All'. However, their specific role and the clinical services they are expected to provide to achieve this are evolving. To explore this issue further, we undertook a narrative review to examine the clinical service expectations of FRHs outlined in academic and policy literature, which identified a total of 404 FRH service expectations. At a global level, some categories of services provide extensive specific service recommendations, likely resulting from historical priorities and the influence of vertical programming and professional interests. However, in several important areas we identified few or no recommendations. At the level of individual country case studies undertaken through this review, FRH clinical service recommendations within available policy documents vary considerably. Our findings suggest a disconnect between the ambition for FRH and the difficult, context-specific decision-making needed at the national level on the role of FRHs as a service delivery platform within integrated health systems helping countries achieve universal health coverage.
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.