ArticleHealth policy and planning2026
Does increasing overall health expenditure reduce inequality in under 5 mortality rates between provinces in Indonesia?
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While public health expenditure is widely assumed to reduce health inequalities, empirical evidence from low- and middle-income countries remains limited. This study examines whether increases in public health spending in Indonesia between 2010 and 2017 reduced inequalities in under-five mortality (U5MR). We combined two approaches to assess distributional effects of health spending. First, we used a dynamic panel System-GMM model to estimate the impact of public health expenditure on within-province inequality in U5MR, measured by the concentration index across household wealth quintiles. Second, we applied instrumental variable quantile regression to identify heterogeneous treatment effects across provinces with different baseline mortality burdens. In addition, we estimated the average effect of public health expenditure on U5MR levels and found no statistically significant impact. The results show that higher public health spending increased inequality in U5MR across socioeconomic groups, with wealthier households capturing a disproportionate share of the mortality reductions. By contrast, we find no statistically significant heterogeneity in the impact of spending between high- and low-mortality provinces. These results suggest that increases in spending were not well-targeted to disadvantaged groups or high-mortality regions. Our findings demonstrate that raising overall levels of public spending is not sufficient to reduce health inequalities unless resources are explicitly directed towards disadvantaged groups and underserved areas. This study provides a proof of concept for applying distribution-sensitive methods to assess the equity impact of health financing, offering lessons that remain highly relevant for Indonesia's post-JKN reforms and contributing to global debates on equity-weighted evaluation, benefit incidence, and the distributional consequences of health spending in LMICs.
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.