Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41272622›Full record

SynthesisPopulation health metrics2025

Methods for modelling composite indices of access to healthcare facilities: a systematic literature review.

Moses M Musau, Ann Njogu, Alex Maina, Robert W Snow, Lenka Beňová, Emelda A Okiro, Catherine Linard, Peter M Macharia

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Population health metrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Moses M MusauKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. mmusau@kemri-wellcome.org.
Ann NjoguDepartment of Public health, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Alex MainaKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Robert W SnowKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lenka BeňováDepartment of Public health, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Emelda A OkiroKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Catherine LinardInstitute of Life, Earth, and Environment (ILEE), University of Namur, Namur, Belgium.
Peter M MachariaKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1201925NWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 202176/Z/18/ZWellcome Trust #203077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to quality healthcare services is key to achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC). The multidimensional nature of access (availability, accessibility, accommodation, affordability and acceptability) makes it challenging to quantify the level of access. Current approaches focus predominantly on single dimensions, limiting the comprehensive monitoring and evaluation of access to healthcare facilities. Here, we conduct a systematic literature review on the methodological approaches and data used to construct multidimensional composite indices of healthcare facility access, globally.

methodsWe undertook a literature search in eight databases including EBSCOhost (CINAHL), Google Scholar, Ovid (Embase and MEDLINE), PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Web of Science (MEDLINE) adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies that incorporated multiple dimensions of access to healthcare facilities to construct a composite index were considered and quality assessment performed. Methodological approaches to measuring access and their supporting conceptual frameworks were synthesised using descriptive summaries and thematic analysis.

resultsOut of 4,291 articles retrieved,19 met inclusion criteria with an average quality score of 19.6 out of 26. Most of the studies (68%) were conducted in 2021-2024, mainly in India (53%) or USA (16%); none in Africa. The composite indices of access combined two (32%), three (42%), four (5%) or all five dimensions (21%), with affordability (84%) being the most frequent dimension. There was significant heterogeneity on the definition, data (survey-based or retrospective) and representation of indicators. There were four weighting techniques ranging from simple (equal weighting) to complex approaches (Principal Component Analysis and Analytical Hierarchy Process). Studies used four different approaches to combine indicators; arithmetic mean (ten studies), summation (six studies), Adjusted Mazziotta-Pareto Index (two studies) and geometric mean (one study). Only 63% validated their output.

conclusionsThere is diversity in the approaches used for multidimensional assessment of access to healthcare facilities. To ensure robust, context-specific and more comprehensive composite indices, the use of clearly defined frameworks, dimension weights that reflect context-specific access barriers and penalised aggregation methods will be required.

Indexed as

Health FacilitiesHealth Services AccessibilityGlobal HealthHumansAcceptabilityAccessibilityAccommodationAffordabilityAvailabilityComposite indexHealthcare accessMultidimensional access

Identifiers

PMID41272622
PMCPMC12706922

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.