ArticleBMC health services research2025
Obstacles to multisectoral maternal and child healthcare financing in Uganda: insights from policy bureaucrats.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maternal and child healthcare (MCH) financing is a global priority, and it is one of the core components of the health systems building blocks. Ensuring adequate MCH financing is critical for better MCH outcomes, but it remains challenging for most developing countries, including Uganda. The country's major structural limitation is its over dependence on donor funding for MCH, which is increasingly shrinking and threatens the current healthcare financing approaches. This study investigates the barriers to effective multisectoral financing for maternal and child health (MCH) in Uganda. To deepen the understanding of these challenges, the research adopted a qualitative methodology, combining semi-structured in-depth interviews with a focused literature review. A total of eight interviews were conducted with key MCH stakeholders. These interviews were complemented by a review of 19 authoritative documents related to MCH financing in Uganda. The study employed thematic analyses to comprehensively present the data. The study identifies several challenges to multisectoral MCH financing, including the absence of a specific and explicit MCH framework on MCH financing, poor understanding of the meaning of multisectoral collaboration in MCH financing, low acceptance of prepayment forms of financing, and failure to fulfill pledges and government commitments. Moreover, the lack of clear and streamlined stakeholders' roles and responsibilities, the failure to prioritise and include MCH issues in all national policies, and fragmentation and vertical funding limit the leveraging of MCH resources. Delays in approving the financing frameworks have hindered the implementation of the financing instruments, thus affecting the pooling of MCH funds in Uganda. This study concludes that, considering the diminishing MCH financial resources due to gaps in current financing frameworks, the Government of Uganda should strengthen and enhance its legal and policy financing instruments.
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.