ArticlePLOS global public health2025
"Crises are a perpetual restart"-A comparative analysis of maternal and newborn health political prioritization across four fragile and conflict affected settings.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inequalities in maternal health service utilisation in Somalia: analysis of the 2020 Somali health and demographic survey.Global health action · 2026Article
- Correction: "Crises are a perpetual restart" - a comparative analysis of maternal and newborn health political prioritization across four fragile and conflict affected settings.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fragile settings account for the highest burden of maternal and neonatal mortality in the world. Although policies and strategies for intervention exist, there are gaps on political prioritization of maternal and newborn health (MNH) by key actors to maximize resources and impact of programs. This study offers a comparative analysis of MNH political prioritization across four fragile national and sub-national settings, and recommendations for improving policies and strategies.Primary data from descriptive case studies conducted in Somalia, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan was analysed comparatively using the Shiffman and Smith (2007) political prioritization framework. In total, eighty-two (82) interviews were conducted with government, international multilateral and non-governmental organizations, national civil society organization, public and private health providers, funders and academic key informants. Across settings, MNH was seen as priority despite the crises and the need to strengthen the health system as a whole. Crisis conditions also created policy windows for transformation of health systems, as evidenced in investments towards universal health coverage (free maternal health services) and community health systems. Transformations were enabled by political championship by local actors, aligned with technical planning, national priorities, and international momentum. Conversely, external actor and budget politics had a negative effect on regulation of the private health sector, inclusivity in decision-making, resource allocation, and policy community cohesion. International actors held significant influence in producing evidence for MNH, mobilizing and distributing resources, and technical program planning.Concerns were raised about their negative impact on local capacities, sustainability, and geographical distribution of services. Across settings, key informants emphasized how involvement of local organizations, civil society, religious and community leaders could enhance accountability, demand for care and political prioritization of MNH. Addressing gender inequities at the provider-patient interface, health facility management and high-level decision-making could also enhance political prioritization and contextualization of programs.
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.