ArticlePLOS global public health2025
How health securitisation shapes health system priorities: A realist synthesis.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. 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.
- The equity catastrophe: how securitized financing collapses essential care during health crises.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Governing health through security in the Philippines: a realist analysis.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health securitisation - i.e., framing health issues as security issues or as threats- is growing in contemporary global health discourse. Given the power disparity between the actors who can frame a health issue or on whose behalf issues are framed and the actors who may experience the consequences of such framing, it is crucial to understand how 'health security' framing impacts health system prioritisation. We conducted a realist synthesis on how ("mechanism") and under what conditions ("context") health securitisation impacts health system priorities ("outcome") at different levels of health governance. To capture contemporary analyses, we searched the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Global Health databases for articles published from 2010 to 2023. We included 51 articles in the realist synthesis: empirical studies and conceptual analyses on the effects of health securitisation (and associated security-oriented policies, practices and measures), even if implicitly, on health system priorities. Through the synthesis, we identified five mechanisms by which 'health security' framing is adopted in response to an event - 'uncertainty' (managing the ambiguity of risks), 'self-protection' (safeguarding own group/national interests), 'self-reliance' (projecting own ability to be autonomous), 'self-preservation' (preserving own institutional credibility), and 'norm-setting' (entrenching long-term policy shifts). We also identified contextual factors (e.g., similar past events, inequities between groups/nations, militarisation of governance, donor influence, geopolitical interests) that influence these mechanisms to generate outcomes in the form of priorities (e.g., mobilisation of funds, overemphasis on one disease or approach over others, abuse of power that disproportionately impact marginalised individuals, groups, and nations). Each mechanism is influenced by a set of contextual factors which are peculiar to a place and time. Understanding these links between context, mechanism, and outcome can allow for a closer examination and anticipation of 'health security' framing and its impact on prioritisation in different settings globally.
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.