ArticleThe International journal of health planning and management2026
'I Think From the Beginning, the Ambitions Were Compromised': A Case Study of COVAX as Vaccine Equity Policy Operationalisation.
Article in The International journal of health planning and management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging Viral Zoonoses: Epidemiology, Vaccination Strategies, and Implications for Global Public Health.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Universal duties in a fragmented world: why Europe must reclaim Kantian ethics for global health governance.European journal of public health · 2026Article
- The 'Other' face of health security: Reimagining epistemic attachments in global health.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- 'I Think From the Beginning, the Ambitions Were Compromised': A Case Study of COVAX as Vaccine Equity Policy Operationalisation.The International journal of health planning and management · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVAX was designed to support the discovery, development, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines globally, at scale and pace. This article examines how COVAX promoted vaccine equity and what lessons can be learnt.
methodsInformed by a scoping review of lessons learnt from GHPs, we reviewed 109 documents related to COVAX and other GHPs and conducted 23 key informant interviews with representatives from GHPs, civil society, academia, and the private sector. Data were synthesised thematically using Rushton and Williams's framework.
resultsData showed how the global health policy context shaped COVAX, with experience with Gavi and CEPI influencing its governance structure. We highlighted weaknesses in transparency and accountability, limited engagement with civil society organisations [CSO] and LMIC stakeholders, contested policy debates (e.g., different framing) and paradigms (e.g., prioritising technical and financial over political solutions).
conclusionsCOVAX largely replicated existing GHP approaches, subsidising research and development and then paying for resulting discoveries. While recognising how this reflects global power structures, in the inevitable next global health crisis, the international health community must advocate for greater LMIC and CSO involvement in decision-making, sharing of intellectual property and technology transfer, and rebalancing of flows of innovation costs and benefits to a broader range of actors across public and private sectors.
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.