ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2026
Comparison of national health planning policies in China and ASEAN: a PMC-index model analysis.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNational health planning is the cornerstone of health system governance, yet comparative analyses between China and ASEAN member states remain fragmented. This study quantitatively evaluates and compares the national health planning documents of China and ASEAN countries to identify structural consistencies, strategic divergences, and areas for cross-border cooperation.
methodsText mining and the Policy Modeling Consistency (PMC) index model were used to analyze 12 national health planning documents. A multi-dimensional evaluation system comprising 9 primary variables and 40 secondary indicators was constructed. Policies were scored using binary logic to generate PMC index and surface visualizations, revealing the structural strengths and weaknesses of each nation’s planning architecture.The health planning and policy documents were sourced from the WHO Country Planning Cycle Database and the government official websites of ASEAN member states.
resultsThe region demonstrates a high degree of policy isomorphism and maturity, with PMC indices ranging from 7.56 to 8.33. Ten countries including Malaysia, Indonesia, and China achieved an “Excellent’ grade, while Vietnam and Timor-Leste were rated “Good”. Text mining revealed a shared transition from infrastructure expansion to quality, systemic integration and digital governance. However, structural heterogeneity exists: while all nations excelled in defining stakeholders, significant gaps were found in X9 Policy Period, where China demonstrated superior long-term strategic depth compared to the static timelines of many ASEAN plans. Additionally, variances in alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were observed in policy prioritization.
conclusionChina and ASEAN countries exhibit strong structural convergence in health governance, characterized by clear objectives and stakeholder delineation. However, optimizing long-term temporal resilience and explicitly aligning domestic priorities with global sustainability targets remain critical areas for improvement. The findings advocate for a “Digital Health Interoperability” mechanism and a “Cross-Border Policy Evaluation” framework to deepen regional health community building. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.