Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42221967›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in health services2026

Public administration and health system strengthening in low- and middle-income countries: exploring strategies to improve healthcare delivery and health governance.

James Ndlovu, Zamokuhle Mbandlwa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in health services, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

James NdlovuFaculty of Management Sciences, Department of Public Management and Economics, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa.
Zamokuhle MbandlwaFaculty of Management Sciences, Department of Public Management and Economics, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Health system strengthening in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains a persistent challenge in LMICs, where reforms often fail to translate into sustained improvements in access, quality, and equity. While existing scholarship has largely focused on technical and financing interventions, less attention has been given to the institutional and administrative conditions that shape reform outcomes. This study addresses this gap by examining how public administration influences health system performance. Guided by Institutional Theory, the study argues that HSS is fundamentally an institutional process, mediated by the coherence and effectiveness of administrative systems. Methods: A qualitative comparative case study design was adopted, focusing on three purposively selected cases: Germany (as a governance comparator), South Africa, and India. Data were collected through documentary analysis of peer-reviewed literature, policy documents, and reports from international organisations. The analysis employed a theoretically informed thematic approach, combining inductive coding with deductive categories derived from Institutional Theory. Comparative analysis was conducted across key dimensions, including governance arrangements, decentralisation, leadership capacity, and digital health integration. Results: The findings reveal that institutional capacity and governance coherence are decisive in shaping health system outcomes. Germany demonstrates how aligned governance structures and regulatory mechanisms enable consistent policy implementation. In contrast, South Africa and India exhibit institutional fragmentation, uneven decentralisation outcomes, and variable leadership capacity, which constrain reform effectiveness. Decentralisation produces divergent outcomes depending on local institutional strength, while digital health integration remains uneven due to infrastructural and administrative limitations. Across cases, the interaction between governance, leadership, and institutional capacity emerges as a critical determinant of reform success. Discussion: The study demonstrates that public administration is not a peripheral factor but a central explanatory variable in HSS. The findings support and refine prior work on governance and health systems by showing that institutional alignment, rather than policy design alone, determines implementation outcomes. Theoretically, the study advances Institutional Theory by illustrating how formal and informal administrative arrangements shape health system performance. Practically, it highlights the need for context-sensitive reforms that prioritise institutional strengthening, leadership development, and coordinated governance. These insights contribute to both public administration and health policy debates, emphasising the necessity of integrating institutional analysis into future health system reforms in LMICs. Conclusion: This study contributes to a deeper understanding of how public administration practices can foster sustainable health system strengthening in LMICs.

Indexed as

health governancehealth system strengtheninginstitutional capacity buildinglow-and middle-income countries (LMICs)public administration

Identifiers

PMID42221967
PMCPMC13216499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.