Envisioning a Global Health Partnership Movement

Jones, Andrew M.

doi:10.1186/s12992-015-0138-4

Cited by 53 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Inviting civil society representatives into public-private partnerships and giving them a seat at the ‘high table’ of global health ( Smith et al , 2016 ) has been a way to respond to such critiques. Political scientists claim that civil society actors can fill the ‘accountability gaps’ in global governance that result from lack of mechanisms like elected leadership and parliamentary oversight, which ensure accountability in nation states ( Scholte, 2004 , p. 212).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civil society participation in global public private partnerships for health

Storeng

Puyvallée

2018

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth of global public-private partnerships for health has opened up new spaces for civil society participation in global health governance. Such participation is often justified by the claim that civil society organizations, because of their independence and links to communities, can help address democratic deficits in global-level decision-making processes. This article examines the notion of ‘civil society engagement’ within major public–private partnerships for health, where civil society is often said to play a particularly important role in mediating between public and private spheres. How do major global health partnerships actually define ‘civil society’, who represents civil society within their global-level decision-making bodies, and what formal power do civil society representatives hold relative to other public and private-sector partners? Based on a structured analysis of publicly available documents of 18 of the largest global public–private partnerships for health, we show that many of them make laudatory claims about the value of their ‘civil society engagement’. Most use the term ‘civil society’ to refer to non-governmental organizations and communities affected by particular health issues, and state that they expect these actors to represent the needs and interests of specific populations in global-level decisions about strategies, funding models and policies. Yet, such civil society actors have a relatively low level of representation within the partnerships’ boards and steering committees, especially compared with private-sector actors (10.3 vs 23.7%). Moreover, there is little evidence of civil society representatives’ direct and substantial influence within the partnerships’ global-level governing bodies, where many decisions affecting country-level programmes are made. Rather, their main role within these partnerships seems to be to implement projects and advocate and raise funds, despite common discourses that emphasise civil society's watchdog function and transformative power. The findings suggest the need for in-depth research into the formal and informal power of civil society within global health governance processes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civil society participation in global public private partnerships for health

Storeng

Puyvallée

2018

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mergio JM, and Nunez A, reported that a bibliometric study was conducted under the title of Influential journals in health research: a bibliometric study; to identify the leading journals over the last 25 years (1990–2014) on Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Health Management and Economics, Health Promotion and Health Behavior, Epidemiology, Health Policy and Services, Medicine, Health Informatics, Engineering and Technology, and Primary Care. The results indicate a wide dispersion between categories being the American Journal of Epidemiology, Environmental Health Perspectives, American Journal of Public Health, and Social Science & Medicine, the journals that have received the highest number of citations over the last 25 years 5. Bibliometric studies have been conducted on journals related mainly to scientific fields and are based principally on various metadata elements such as author, title, subject, citations and so forth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences: A bibliometric assessment 2001-2010

Baladi¹,

Umedani²

2017

Pak J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:The aim of this study was to measure the growth of scientific research, authors’ productivity, affiliation with the institute and geographic locations published in the Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences during the period of 2001 – 2010.Methods:This numerical analysis was conducted during mid-August 2016 to mid-October, 2016. The data for the study was downloaded from websites of e-journal of Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences (PJMS) and Pak Medi-Net Com.Results:A total number of 1199 articled were covered by PJMS in 10 volumes and 40 issues with contribution of 3798 (3%) authors during 2001 – 2010. The average number of papers per issue is 30%. A gender wise contribution of males was higher 3050 (80%) than the females 748 (20%). A majority of articles were multi-authored 1052 (87%) as opposed to single author contribution 147 (13%). All 1199 articles were covered under four major disciplines i.e Basic medical sciences, medicine & allied, surgery & allied and radiological sciences and 39 sub-specialties according to medical subject headings (MeSH). It observed that 467 (39%) articles were published in Pakistan and 732 (61%) articles produced by other 32 countries. The Karachi city of Pakistan has produced 199 (16%) articles as highest as its national level and followed by Tehran (Iran) 77 (6%) as followed internationally.Conclusion:This study reveals that the participation of 32 countries in the PJMS publications proves it to be an internationally circulated journal to support research with the constant approach of publishing articles to each volume in basic medical sciences, biomedical, clinical and public health sciences.Abbreviations:DOAJ: Directory of Open Access JournalsIMEMR: Index Medicus Eastern Mediterranean RegionHEC: Higher Education Commission (Pakistan)PJMS: Pakistan Journal of Medical SciencesMeSH: Medical Subject HeadingsPMDC: Pakistan Medical & Dental CouncilSCIE: Science Citation Index Expanded

show abstract

“…Currently, 2.2 million more surgeons, anesthesiologists, and OB/GYNs are needed to address the global need for surgery [ 3 ]. Without the proper surgical workforce, it may be difficult to scale up surgical care to meet the World Health Organization's and Lancet Commision on Global Surgery's goals for 2030 [ 3 , 13 ]. In addition to providing clinical care in LMICs, efforts are becoming increasingly focused on teaching surgery and helping set up surgical residency programs through effective partnerships [ 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unifying a fragmented effort: a qualitative framework for improving international surgical teaching collaborations

Fallah

Bernstein

2017

Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAccess to adequate surgical care is limited globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To address this issue, surgeons are becoming increasingly involved in international surgical teaching collaborations (ISTCs), which include educational partnerships between surgical teams in high-income countries and those in LMICs. The purpose of this study is to determine a framework for unifying, systematizing, and improving the quality of ISTCs so that they can better address the global surgical need.MethodsA convenience sample of 68 surgeons, anesthesiologists, physicians, residents, nurses, academics, and administrators from the U.S., Canada, and Norway was used for the study. Participants all had some involvement in ISTCs and came from multiple specialties and institutions. Qualitative methodology was used, and participants were interviewed using a pre-determined set of open-ended questions. Data was gathered over two months either in-person, over the phone, or on Skype. Data was evaluated using thematic content analysis.ResultsTo organize and systematize ISTCs, participants reported a need for a centralized/systematized process with designated leaders, a universal data bank of current efforts/progress, communication amongst involved parties, full-time administrative staff, dedicated funds, a scholarly approach, increased use of technology, and more research on needs and outcomes.ConclusionBy taking steps towards unifying and systematizing ISTCs, the quality of ISTCs can be improved. This could lead to an advancement in efforts to increase access to surgical care worldwide.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12992-017-0296-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Envisioning a Global Health Partnership Movement

Cited by 53 publications

References 6 publications

Civil society participation in global public private partnerships for health

Civil society participation in global public private partnerships for health

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences: A bibliometric assessment 2001-2010

Unifying a fragmented effort: a qualitative framework for improving international surgical teaching collaborations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About