ArticleHealth policy and planning2026
Health systems resilience and private for-profit sector engagement: lessons from the second COVID-19 wave in Uttar Pradesh, India.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
India's second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in April-June 2021 involved an explosion of case numbers, with devastating consequences for the country's already strained health systems. This case study examines the private health market response to the pandemic in Uttar Pradesh, India's most populous state. We analyzed 203 news articles to understand both the experiences of private providers and patients in response to government policies being implemented in the state. This analysis informed our interviews with 20 state-level officials, district-level key informants, and formal and informal private for-profit providers across three districts. We found that private-sector hospitals were rapidly engaged to manage a surge in new infections and severe cases, but private bed capacity quickly filled, causing patients to be turned away. Informal private providers played a vital role in rural areas, serving as round-the-clock care sources. However, the news media reported inadequate medical care from such providers leading to COVID-19-related deaths. Access to reliable information on COVID-19 was challenging and social media became a platform for citizens and providers to share information about available resources, treatment, and COVID-19 management. However, misinformation also spread. While the government attempted to counter misinformation and regulate private hospitals, challenges persisted in providing and accessing accurate information. Oxygen and drug supply challenges also emerged, with private hospitals requiring patients to arrange for oxygen themselves due to scarcity. To address this and rising costs of care, the government issued price caps, monitored overcharging, and regulated drug and oxygen distribution. Government schemes also attempted to provide insurance for both public and private health workers, however, awareness and implementation of such schemes were inadequate. Policymakers should develop mechanisms to engage, or where relevant, integrate all private for-profit providers onto a common platform, strengthen referral linkages amongst them, and support communities of practice to increase awareness of government health policies and improve the implementation of government schemes. Such measures would help facilitate equitable access to care and help manage current health needs and future health emergencies.
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.