ReviewBMJ global health2025
Stewarding COVID-19 health systems response in Pakistan: what more can be done for a primary health care approach to future pandemics?
Review in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Primary Health Care into Flexible Surge Capacity: Bridging the Subnational "Missing Middle" in Health Emergency Preparedness.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Service readiness of Public and private health facilities for roll-out of hepatitis C screening and management: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Role of a primary healthcare approach in COVID-19 pandemic response in the eastern Mediterranean region: multicountry case study synthesis.BMJ global health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We apply a primary healthcare (PHC) perspective to gauge Pakistan's health systems response to COVID-19, to identify stewardship lessons for integrating the PHC pandemic response. Analysis of Pakistan's response against the Astana PHC framework shows that the imperative for national survival helped mobilise an agile response across a fragmented health security context. The findings show effective multisector governance in responding to the health and social aspects of the pandemic, as well as the rapid roll-out of several public health functions and emergency care. However, we found weak maintenance of essential health services and ad hoc, short-lived efforts for community engagement.Critical enablers that helped steward the response across complex power-sharing arrangements included solidarity across society, collaborative data-driven decision-making, leveraging of siloed domestic resources and private sector coordination. At the same time, a more PHC-centric response was constrained by weak political prioritisation of essential health services, uneven services, weak direction to civil society volunteerism for community engagement and weak regulation of private sector contribution.We conclude that a mindset shift is required from short-term tactical measures to long-term investment in PHC-oriented transformative stewardship. Future preparedness must build attention to essential service package for emergencies, mobilisation of both private and public primary care providers, effective community engagement vision across societal actors and market regulation, within a collaborative governance framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.