ArticleBMJ public health2026
Global health consequences of the 2025 US foreign aid freeze: rapid assessments in Colombia, Kenya and Nepal.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
Introduction: In January 2025, the Trump Administration announced a 90-day freeze on all US government (USG) foreign aid, which subsequently became a permanent shutdown of the US Agency for International Development in July 2025. The sudden withdrawal of USG financing disrupted health and humanitarian systems worldwide, with disproportionate impacts on women, girls and other marginalised populations. This study documents impacts of the funding freeze during its early months (February-March 2025) on global health programmes. Methods: This rapid mixed-methods assessment combined a global online survey with qualitative case studies in Nepal, Kenya and Colombia. The survey was distributed via email through networks and relevant listservs. Semistructured key informant interviews (KIIs) (n=53) were conducted with non-governmental organisation leaders, clinicians, community health workers, government officials and humanitarian actors, all purposively selected based on their direct or indirect involvement in USG-funded health programmes. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed and triangulated with quantitative findings. Results: Survey respondents reported initial impacts of the USG funding cuts across health sectors and functions, including humanitarian and emergency response/preparedness, gender-based violence and mental health and psychosocial support. Five key themes arose from the KIIs with stakeholders in three case study countries: disruptions to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) services, HIV service interruptions and treatment access, the collapse of referral networks and service ecosystems, a mental health crisis among clients and health workers and the rising vulnerability of marginalised populations. Both survey and interview data highlighted growing inequities and anticipated reversals in longstanding health gains. Conclusions: The 2025 US foreign aid freeze generated immediate and widespread disruptions across health and humanitarian systems, revealing systems-level vulnerabilities. These early findings point to the need for more diversified and reliable financing, stronger domestic preparedness and policy approaches that centre SRHR and marginalised populations.
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.