Primary care financing: a systematic assessment of research priorities in low- and middle-income countries.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Goodyear-Smith, Felicity en
dc.contributor.author Bazemore, Andrew en
dc.contributor.author Coffman, Megan en
dc.contributor.author Fortier, Richard en
dc.contributor.author Howe, Amanda en
dc.contributor.author Kidd, Michael en
dc.contributor.author Phillips, Robert en
dc.contributor.author Rouleau, Katherine en
dc.contributor.author van Weel, Chris en
dc.date.accessioned 2020-04-03T03:14:12Z en
dc.date.issued 2019-01 en
dc.identifier.citation BMJ global health 4(Suppl 8):e001483 Jan 2019 en
dc.identifier.issn 2059-7908 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2292/50242 en
dc.description.abstract Introduction:Financing of primary healthcare (PHC) is the key to the provision of equitable universal care. We aimed to identify and prioritise the perceived needs of PHC practitioners and researchers for new research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) about financing of PHC. Methods:Three-round expert panel consultation using web-based surveys of LMIC PHC practitioners, academics and policy-makers sampled from global networks. Iterative literature review conducted in parallel. First round (Pre-Delphi survey) elicited possible research questions to address knowledge gaps about financing. Responses were independently coded, collapsed and synthesised to two lists of questions. Round 2 (Delphi Round 1) invited panellists to rate importance of each question. In Round 3 (Delphi Round 2), panellists ranked questions in order of importance. Results:A diverse range of PHC practitioners, academics and policy-makers in LMIC representing all global regions identified 479 knowledge gaps as potentially critical to improving PHC financing. Round 2 provided 31 synthesised questions on financing for rating. The top 16 were ranked in Round 3e to produce four prioritised research questions. Conclusions:This novel exercise created an expansive and prioritised list of critical knowledge gaps in PHC financing research questions. This offers valuable guidance to global supporters of primary care evaluation and implementation, including research funders and academics seeking research priorities. The source and context specificity of this research, informed by LMIC practitioners and academics on a global and local basis, should increase the likelihood of local relevance and eventual success in implementing the findings. en
dc.format.medium Electronic-eCollection en
dc.language eng en
dc.relation.ispartofseries BMJ global health en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 en
dc.title Primary care financing: a systematic assessment of research priorities in low- and middle-income countries. en
dc.type Journal Article en
dc.identifier.doi 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001483 en
pubs.issue Suppl 8 en
pubs.begin-page e001483 en
pubs.volume 4 en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The authors en
pubs.publication-status Published en
dc.rights.accessrights http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/OpenAccess en
pubs.subtype research-article en
pubs.subtype Journal Article en
pubs.elements-id 789134 en
pubs.org-id Medical and Health Sciences en
pubs.org-id Population Health en
pubs.org-id Gen.Practice& Primary Hlthcare en
dc.identifier.eissn 2059-7908 en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2019-09-04 en
pubs.dimensions-id 31478025 en


Files in this item

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics