ArticleMalaria journal2025
Strengthening country ownership of national antimalarial policymaking: insights from Laos, Pakistan and the Solomon Islands.
Article in Malaria journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe concept of "ownership" in global health policymaking broadly assumes that external donors and advisors expect recipient countries to actively steward their national programmes when assistance is provided. This study specifically explored country ownership of national policy decision-making for Plasmodium vivax malaria using three case studies: Laos, Pakistan and the Solomon Islands.
methodsYin's comparative case study model, Kingdon's Multiple Streams policy theory guided this analysis. From 2021 to 2024, interviews were undertaken with 29 national stakeholders, external partners and relevant global stakeholders.
resultsThere were four main findings: firstly, national malaria programme respondents expressed strong ownership of internal antimalarial policy processes but acknowledged nuanced influence of external donors on the national policymaking space. Second, in countries relying on external funding, antimalarial policy change is mainly triggered by the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations and WHO national support was identified as a key enabler of policy change. Third, external donors often influence, or outline policy directions aligned with WHO recommendations, but policy change is also driven by antimalarial tools procurement constraints. Fourth, timing of updated WHO recommendations may not align with countries' needs. Yet many malaria endemic countries face pressure from external funders, that resource national policy decision-making, to adhere to WHO recommendations, although the WHO considers its recommendations as advisory only. Overall, these external influences moderate country ownership of national policy change.
conclusionsThis study indicates that there is potential to strengthen country ownership of national antimalarial policymaking. This may require application of targeted policy acceleration levers such as better alignment of timing of global guidance with country needs and an understanding between external donors and national stakeholders that WHO guidance is advisory only and should be understood as one perspective relative to country needs.
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.