ArticleBMJ global health2026
Trends in government and donor funding for vertical and horizontal community health worker programmes in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in BMJ global health, 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.
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
introductionCommunity health worker (CHW) programmes are central to primary healthcare (PHC) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Yet who pays for them, how much, and whether funds favour vertical (single-disease) or horizontal (broader-focus) programmes remains unclear. This study examined trends in donor and government financing for CHW programmes across SSA.
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of publicly available data. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Creditor Reporting System (2002-2022) projects were screened and classified as vertical or horizontal through standard definitions and manual review. Government spending in 37 SSA countries (using WHO Global Health Expenditure Database (2016-2022) was estimated by applying maturity-based allocation percentages to preventive and outpatient curative functions. We described trends, donor composition, vertical-horizontal shares and the annual financing gap against published cost benchmarks.
resultsBetween 2002 and 2022, global external assistance for CHW programmes totalled US$14.4 billion, SSA receiving 76% (US$11.0 billion). Of donor funds to SSA, 76.4% supported vertical programmes, although these made up fewer than 20% of projects; horizontal programmes received just 14.7%. Annual external assistance rose from ~US$0.28 billion (2016-2019) to ~US$1.83 billion (2020-2022), with over 90% directed to vertical or COVID-19-related efforts. Government spending across 37 SSA countries totalled ~US$1.4 billion (2016-2022). This represented less than 20% of total CHW funding but a greater share directed to horizontal services (54.6%). The annual financing gap remained between US$4.7 billion and US$4.3 billion.
conclusionsCHW financing in SSA is donor-dominant and vertically oriented; domestic allocations are limited but relatively more horizontal. Closing the funding gap will require larger, predictable government budgets for CHWs, better-aligned partner support and stronger expenditure tracking to sustain PHC and advance universal health coverage.
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.