ReviewDialogues in health2025
Understanding decision-making around human and livestock health in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review.
Review in Dialogues in health, 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
Household decisions shape health outcomes in subsistence farming communities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where human wellbeing is closely linked to livestock productivity. We conducted a systematic review, guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), of 135 primary studies from Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Using the Household Production of Health (HPH) framework, we structured research questions, extracted and synthesised evidence and identified health interventions in human and livestock health in SSA. We coded decision loci (sole vs joint decision-making) and characterised their prevalence, context and determinants of household health outcomes. Sole decisions dominated (40 % of human studies, 42 % of livestock studies) with men making the majority of the decisions, especially in livestock health, while joint decisions were less common (27 %, 32 % respectively) and focused on maternal, neonatal and child health. Women's decision-making power tended to increase with education, income and urban residence, while male authority was greater in rural areas where fewer income-earning opportunities for women prevail. The two HPH frameworks are tightly linked as behaviours that improve livestock health and productivity benefit nutrition, income and access to care for household members. We recommend gender-responsive, One Health policies that support women's control in areas of existing responsibility and engage men as active partners in shared decision-making within households to reduce inequalities. These efforts should be supported by progress towards universal health coverage, functioning health insurance schemes and accessible veterinary services to reduce inequalities and within-household trade-offs, and to improve health and livelihood resilience in SSA.
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.