ArticleCureus2025
Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Action: Identifying the Social Security Doctrine in Iran.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Effective implementation of social security policies remains a key challenge, often due to the lack of coherence between theory, policy formulation, and execution. This study investigates the concept of "doctrine" as a guiding framework for aligning these levels and aims to identify the existing social security doctrine in Iran. In this study, doctrine is defined as a comprehensive, non-prescriptive, and authoritative framework of shared beliefs and principles that pragmatically address policy challenges. It facilitates alignment by offering a shared interpretive lens that enables actors across levels to coordinate actions, reduce ambiguities, and implement policies more consistently. Methods This qualitative study followed an integrative design across three sequential phases. First, a systematic literature review was conducted to conceptualize the doctrine and define its characteristics. Second, five experts participated in focus group discussions (FGDs) to identify key challenges and relevant legal sources within the Iranian context. Third, a qualitative content analysis was performed on three core legal documents - the Constitution, the Law on the Structure of the Welfare and Social Security System, and the Social Security Law - along with their legislative deliberations. Data were coded using Atlas.ti version 8.1.3. Each phase informed the next to ensure analytical coherence. Ethical approval was obtained from the University's Research Ethics Committee, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. Results Seven doctrinal domains, comprising 18 categories and approximately 60 codes, were identified:
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.