ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2026
Factors influencing public health financing in British Columbia: A qualitative case study.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What counts as public health expenditures? A comparative case study of Australia, Canada, and England.BMC public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThough sufficient and stable funds are critical to effective public health systems, existing literature on public health system financing is limited. This study aimed to address this gap by uncovering the salient factors influencing public health system financial decision-making.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative case study of public health system financing in British Columbia, consisting of a jurisdictional review of academic and grey literature, and semi-structured interviews with 14 participants influential in public health budget-setting. Taking an inductive analytical approach, we constructed a conceptual model of the political, structural, and external factors influencing public health funding trends. Building on insight from participants, we identified promising policy considerations for improving the sustainability of public health funding.
resultsParticipants identified that external factors such as public health crises and major sociopolitical events create windows of opportunity for investments or cuts. They reported that structurally separating public health budgets from other health service budgets seems to protect public health funding. Political priorities of top decision-makers were highlighted as the most influential political factor, though advocacy has been successful in bringing public health issues onto the political agenda. Strong relationships between public health actors and decision-makers such as senior executives are seen as important for promoting investment in public health programs.
conclusionThis study sheds light on some of the possible policy strategies for sustaining public health funding, such as inclusion of public health experts in financial decision-making and developing public health performance indicators, which may inform current public health system strengthening efforts.
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.