Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40405179›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2025

To what extent is equity entrenched in HIV/AIDS-related policy documents in Ethiopia? A policy content analysis.

Aklilu Endalamaw, Charles F Gilks, Yibeltal Assefa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Aklilu EndalamawSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. yaklilu12@gmail.com.
Charles F GilksSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Yibeltal AssefaSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIt is important to assess the extent of mentions of equity in policy and strategic documents for several reasons. First, it helps us understand the root causes of inequities, revealing both failures and successes. Second, it shows the readiness of stakeholders and leaders to take actions towards equity. Third, it identifies areas of improvement to plan strategies towards equity. The objective of this study was to assess the degree to which equity is incorporated in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-related policy documents in Ethiopia.

methodsA policy content analysis was conducted on the basis of Marmot's social determinants of health framework. We have included policies, strategic plans, guidelines and reports on the basis of relevance to HIV/AIDS, timeliness and availability to the public. The search for documents took place between 1 March 2023 and 1 May 2023. The included documents in the content analysis were published between 1998 and 2022. These documents were accessed from Google, the Joint United Nations Programmes for HIV/AIDS, the WHO, the World Bank, the Ethiopian Federal Ministry of Health and the International Institute for Primary Health Care-Ethiopia websites. These documents were evaluated for mentioning equity in broader view or in relation to social categories (residence, occupation/employment, religion, sex/gender, ethnicity, education, income, region, age and multiple disadvantaged groups) and structural dimensions or health systems building blocks, such as health leadership and governance, workforce, financing, medical products and technologies and information systems. A Bardache's eightfold policy analysis guided the content analysis and synthesis of findings.

resultsA total of 26 documents were reviewed and analysed. Mentions of equity in policy documents increased over time, but the level of mention varied among national plans, treatment guidelines and reports. Over time, the mentioning of equity increased in strategic plans and guidelines, while it decreased in reports. In the same documents, there seems to be a shift from equality to equity because mentions of (in)equity increased from 149 between 2011 and 2015 to 328 between 2016 and 2022, while (in)equality mentions declined from 117 to 53 during the same period. Equity was mentioned in relation to health system functions and/or social classes. Gender (in)equity was the most frequently mentioned issue, while (in)equity related to multiple disadvantaged groups, religion, employment status and social capital was less frequently mentioned. (In)equity is deeply embedded in health system governance, but it is least integrated into the health information system.

conclusionsThe mentioning and consideration of (in)equity in policy and strategic documents have increased over time, but not consistently or comprehensively. Growing emphasis has been placed on equity rather than equality. The shift from equality to equity in HIV/AIDS policy documents reflects a more nuanced understanding of the diverse needs of individuals and groups. More attention is given to gender issues and health system governance than to other dimensions of equity. It is vital that policy-makers revise their HIV/AIDS-related policy documents to promote health equity for all social strata, particularly among multiple disadvantaged groups. Health information systems should be designed in such a way that they generate and manage information to assess the extent of (in)equity and the progress towards equity in HIV/AIDS services.

Indexed as

Acquired Immunodeficiency SyndromeHealth EquityHealth PolicyHIV InfectionsPolicy MakingSocial Determinants of HealthEthiopiaHumansSocioeconomic FactorsEqualityEquityEthiopiaHealth policyHIV/AIDS

Identifiers

PMID40405179
PMCPMC12096652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.