卫生系统描述与评估:系统分析模板的范围界定审查

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Research Policy and Systems Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.1186/s12961-024-01166-y
Ruth Waitzberg, Isabel Pfundstein, Anna Maresso, Bernd Rechel, Ewout van Ginneken, Wilm Quentin
{"title":"卫生系统描述与评估:系统分析模板的范围界定审查","authors":"Ruth Waitzberg, Isabel Pfundstein, Anna Maresso, Bernd Rechel, Ewout van Ginneken, Wilm Quentin","doi":"10.1186/s12961-024-01166-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understanding and comparing health systems is key for cross-country learning and health system strengthening. Templates help to develop standardised and coherent descriptions and assessments of health systems, which then allow meaningful analyses and comparisons. Our scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing templates, their content and the way data is presented. Based on the WHO building blocks framework, we defined templates as having (1) an overall framework, (2) a list of indicators or topics, and (3) instructions for authors, while covering (4) the design of the health system, (5) an assessment of health system performance, and (6) should cover the entire health system. We conducted a scoping review of grey literature published between 2000 and 2023 to identify templates. The content of the identified templates was screened, analyzed and compared. We found 12 documents that met our inclusion criteria. The building block `health financing´ is covered in all 12 templates; and many templates cover ´service delivery´ and ´health workforce’. Health system performance is frequently assessed with regard to ‘access and coverage’, ‘quality and safety’, and ‘financial protection’. Most templates do not cover ‘responsiveness’ and ‘efficiency’. Seven templates combine quantitative and qualitative data, three are mostly quantitative, and two are primarily qualitative. Templates cover data and information that is mostly relevant for specific groups of countries, e.g. a particular geographical region, or for high or for low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Templates for LMICs rely more on survey-based indicators than administrative data. This is the first scoping review of templates for standardized descriptions of health systems and assessments of their performance. The implications are that (1) templates can help analyze health systems across countries while accounting for context; (2) template-guided analyses of health systems could underpin national health policies, strategies, and plans; (3) organizations developing templates could learn from approaches of other templates; and (4) more research is needed on how to improve templates to better achieve their goals. Our findings provide an overview and help identify the most important aspects and topics to look at when comparing and analyzing health systems, and how data are commonly presented. The templates were created by organizations with different agendas and target audiences, and with different end products in mind. Comprehensive health systems analyses and comparisons require production of quantitative indicators and complementing them with qualitative information to build a holistic picture. Clinical Trial Registration: Not applicable.","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health system description and assessment: a scoping review of templates for systematic analyses\",\"authors\":\"Ruth Waitzberg, Isabel Pfundstein, Anna Maresso, Bernd Rechel, Ewout van Ginneken, Wilm Quentin\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12961-024-01166-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Understanding and comparing health systems is key for cross-country learning and health system strengthening. Templates help to develop standardised and coherent descriptions and assessments of health systems, which then allow meaningful analyses and comparisons. Our scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing templates, their content and the way data is presented. Based on the WHO building blocks framework, we defined templates as having (1) an overall framework, (2) a list of indicators or topics, and (3) instructions for authors, while covering (4) the design of the health system, (5) an assessment of health system performance, and (6) should cover the entire health system. We conducted a scoping review of grey literature published between 2000 and 2023 to identify templates. The content of the identified templates was screened, analyzed and compared. We found 12 documents that met our inclusion criteria. The building block `health financing´ is covered in all 12 templates; and many templates cover ´service delivery´ and ´health workforce’. Health system performance is frequently assessed with regard to ‘access and coverage’, ‘quality and safety’, and ‘financial protection’. Most templates do not cover ‘responsiveness’ and ‘efficiency’. Seven templates combine quantitative and qualitative data, three are mostly quantitative, and two are primarily qualitative. Templates cover data and information that is mostly relevant for specific groups of countries, e.g. a particular geographical region, or for high or for low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Templates for LMICs rely more on survey-based indicators than administrative data. This is the first scoping review of templates for standardized descriptions of health systems and assessments of their performance. The implications are that (1) templates can help analyze health systems across countries while accounting for context; (2) template-guided analyses of health systems could underpin national health policies, strategies, and plans; (3) organizations developing templates could learn from approaches of other templates; and (4) more research is needed on how to improve templates to better achieve their goals. Our findings provide an overview and help identify the most important aspects and topics to look at when comparing and analyzing health systems, and how data are commonly presented. The templates were created by organizations with different agendas and target audiences, and with different end products in mind. Comprehensive health systems analyses and comparisons require production of quantitative indicators and complementing them with qualitative information to build a holistic picture. Clinical Trial Registration: Not applicable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01166-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01166-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

了解和比较卫生系统是跨国学习和加强卫生系统的关键。模板有助于对卫生系统进行标准化、连贯一致的描述和评估,从而进行有意义的分析和比较。我们的范围审查旨在概述现有模板、其内容和数据展示方式。根据世界卫生组织的构件框架,我们将模板定义为:(1) 一个总体框架,(2) 一份指标或主题清单,(3) 给作者的说明,同时涵盖(4) 卫生系统的设计,(5) 卫生系统绩效评估,以及(6) 应涵盖整个卫生系统。我们对 2000 年至 2023 年间发表的灰色文献进行了范围界定,以确定模板。我们对已确定模板的内容进行了筛选、分析和比较。我们发现有 12 篇文献符合我们的纳入标准。所有 12 个模板都涵盖了 "卫生筹资 "这一组成部分;许多模板还涵盖了 "服务提供 "和 "卫生工作者"。卫生系统的绩效经常在 "获取和覆盖"、"质量和安全 "以及 "财务保护 "方面进行评估。大多数模板不包括 "响应能力 "和 "效率"。7 个模板结合了定量和定性数据,3 个主要是定量数据,2 个主要是定性数据。模板涵盖的数据和信息主要与特定国家群体相关,如特定地理区域、高收入国家或中低收入国家(LMICs)。针对中低收入国家的模板更多地依赖于基于调查的指标而非行政数据。这是对卫生系统标准化描述及其绩效评估模板的首次范围审查。其意义在于:(1) 模板有助于分析各国的卫生系统,同时考虑到具体情况;(2) 以模板为指导的卫生系统分析可作为国家卫生政策、战略和计划的基础;(3) 开发模板的组织可借鉴其他模板的方法;(4) 需要就如何改进模板以更好地实现其目标开展更多研究。我们的研究结果提供了一个概览,有助于确定在比较和分析卫生系统时需要关注的最重要方面和主题,以及数据通常是如何呈现的。这些模板是由具有不同议程和目标受众的组织创建的,并考虑到了不同的最终产品。要对医疗卫生系统进行全面分析和比较,就必须编制定量指标,并辅以定性信息,以全面了解情况。临床试验注册:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Health system description and assessment: a scoping review of templates for systematic analyses
Understanding and comparing health systems is key for cross-country learning and health system strengthening. Templates help to develop standardised and coherent descriptions and assessments of health systems, which then allow meaningful analyses and comparisons. Our scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing templates, their content and the way data is presented. Based on the WHO building blocks framework, we defined templates as having (1) an overall framework, (2) a list of indicators or topics, and (3) instructions for authors, while covering (4) the design of the health system, (5) an assessment of health system performance, and (6) should cover the entire health system. We conducted a scoping review of grey literature published between 2000 and 2023 to identify templates. The content of the identified templates was screened, analyzed and compared. We found 12 documents that met our inclusion criteria. The building block `health financing´ is covered in all 12 templates; and many templates cover ´service delivery´ and ´health workforce’. Health system performance is frequently assessed with regard to ‘access and coverage’, ‘quality and safety’, and ‘financial protection’. Most templates do not cover ‘responsiveness’ and ‘efficiency’. Seven templates combine quantitative and qualitative data, three are mostly quantitative, and two are primarily qualitative. Templates cover data and information that is mostly relevant for specific groups of countries, e.g. a particular geographical region, or for high or for low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Templates for LMICs rely more on survey-based indicators than administrative data. This is the first scoping review of templates for standardized descriptions of health systems and assessments of their performance. The implications are that (1) templates can help analyze health systems across countries while accounting for context; (2) template-guided analyses of health systems could underpin national health policies, strategies, and plans; (3) organizations developing templates could learn from approaches of other templates; and (4) more research is needed on how to improve templates to better achieve their goals. Our findings provide an overview and help identify the most important aspects and topics to look at when comparing and analyzing health systems, and how data are commonly presented. The templates were created by organizations with different agendas and target audiences, and with different end products in mind. Comprehensive health systems analyses and comparisons require production of quantitative indicators and complementing them with qualitative information to build a holistic picture. Clinical Trial Registration: Not applicable.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
期刊最新文献
The embedded research model: an answer to the research and evaluation needs of community service organizations? Implementation of national policies and interventions (WHO Best Buys) for non-communicable disease prevention and control in Ghana: a mixed methods analysis. Policy impact of the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team: global perspective and United Kingdom case study. Real-world data to improve organ and tissue donation policies: lessons learned from the tissue and organ donor epidemiology study. "All of these things interact, that's why it's such a wicked problem": Stakeholders' perspectives of what hinders low back pain care in Australia and how to improve it.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1