ArticleGlobal health action2026
Managing health systems under armed conflict: a scoping review of international evidence and a document review of Iranian experiences.
Article in Global health action, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wars and armed conflicts are among the most critical crises that can severely impact a country's vital infrastructures, particularly the health system. During wartime, health systems face major challenges, including attacks on healthcare facilities and personnel, which disrupt access to services and undermine public health. This study aims to conduct a scoping review to assess reported international strategies for wartime health system management, focusing on resource allocation, workforce distribution, financing, and access to essential supplies, followed by a document review of Iranian experiences to inform policy recommendations. We used the JBI framework for the scoping review phase. Relevant English and Persian studies were systematically searched across multiple databases without time limitation, and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. We included 26 international studies and 27 Iranian documents in our study. Findings showed that health systems in armed conflict settings face multiple challenges, including damaged infrastructure, shortages of health workforce, disruptions in essential services, limited financial resources, psychological stress on staff, and reduced patient access to care. Interventions such as digital health tools, e-learning, intersectoral collaboration, national and international networks, and community-based approaches were commonly reported as strategies that may support service continuity and resilience in conflict settings. Key recommendations for building resilient health systems in conflict settings include systematic emergency preparedness and coordination plans, decentralization of essential health services to ensure continuity of care, strategic investment in workforce capacity and mental health support, and the establishment of mechanisms that foster flexibility, learning, and international collaboration.
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.