• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

卫生与其他部门:乌干达穆科诺区的多部门资源分配偏好。

Health versus other sectors: Multisectoral resource allocation preferences in Mukono district, Uganda.

机构信息

Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America.

Department of Health Policy Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Jul 30;15(7):e0235250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235250. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0235250
PMID:32730256
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7392331/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To elicit citizen preferences for national budget resource allocation in Uganda, examine respondents' preferences for health vis-à-vis other sectors, and compare these preferences with actual government budget allocations.

METHODS

We surveyed 432 households in urban and rural areas of Mukono district in central Uganda.We elicited citizens' preferences for resource allocation across all sectors using a best-worst scaling (BWS) survey. The BWS survey consisted of 16 sectors corresponding to the Uganda national budget line items. Respondents chose, from a subset of four sectors across 16 choice tasks, which sectors they thought were most and least important to allocate resources to. We utilized the relative best-minus-worst score method and a conditional logistic regression to obtain ranked preferences for resource allocation across sectors. We then compared the respondents' preferences with actual government budget allocations.

RESULTS

The health sector was the top ranked sector where 82% of respondents selected health as the most important sector for the government to fund, but it was ranked sixth in national budget allocation, encompassing 6.4% of the total budget. Beyond health, water and environment, agriculture, and social development sectors were largely underfunded compared to respondents' preferences. Works and transport, education, security, and justice, law and order received a larger share of the national budget compared to respondents' preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Among respondents from Mukono district in Uganda, we found that citizens' preferences for resource allocation across sectors, including for the health sector, were fundamentally misaligned with current government budget allocations. Evidence of respondents' strong preferences for allocating resources to the health sector could help stakeholders make the case for increased health sector allocations. Greater investment in health is not only essential to satisfy citizens' needs and preferences, but also to meet the government's health goals to improve health, strengthen health systems, and achieve universal health coverage.

摘要

目的

了解乌干达公民对国家预算资源分配的偏好,考察受访者对卫生相对于其他部门的偏好,并将这些偏好与实际政府预算分配进行比较。

方法

我们在乌干达中部穆科诺区的城乡地区调查了 432 户家庭。我们使用最佳最差分级(BWS)调查来了解公民对所有部门资源分配的偏好。BWS 调查由 16 个部门组成,对应乌干达国家预算项目。受访者从 16 项选择任务中的四个部门子集中选择他们认为最需要和最不需要分配资源的部门。我们利用相对最佳减去最差评分法和条件逻辑回归来获得跨部门资源分配的优先排序偏好。然后,我们将受访者的偏好与实际政府预算分配进行了比较。

结果

卫生部门是排名最高的部门,82%的受访者选择卫生作为政府资助的最重要部门,但在国家预算分配中排名第六,占总预算的 6.4%。除卫生部门外,水和环境、农业和社会发展部门的资金远远低于受访者的偏好。与受访者的偏好相比,工程和交通、教育、安全以及司法、法律和秩序部门获得了更大份额的国家预算。

结论

在乌干达穆科诺区的受访者中,我们发现公民对跨部门资源分配的偏好,包括对卫生部门的偏好,与当前政府预算分配存在根本上的不一致。受访者强烈希望将资源分配给卫生部门的证据,可以帮助利益相关者为增加卫生部门的拨款提出理由。增加对卫生部门的投资不仅对满足公民的需求和偏好至关重要,而且对实现政府改善卫生、加强卫生系统和实现全民健康覆盖的卫生目标也至关重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ea4/7392331/02d76e8b3aac/pone.0235250.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ea4/7392331/3557840ba03d/pone.0235250.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ea4/7392331/02d76e8b3aac/pone.0235250.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ea4/7392331/3557840ba03d/pone.0235250.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1ea4/7392331/02d76e8b3aac/pone.0235250.g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Health versus other sectors: Multisectoral resource allocation preferences in Mukono district, Uganda.卫生与其他部门:乌干达穆科诺区的多部门资源分配偏好。
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 30;15(7):e0235250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235250. eCollection 2020.
2
Decentralization and health resource allocation: a case study at the district level in Indonesia.权力下放与卫生资源分配:印度尼西亚县级层面的案例研究
Healthc Q. 2008;11(2):117-25.
3
Financial priorities under decentralization in Uganda.乌干达权力下放过程中的财政优先事项。
Health Policy Plan. 2001 Jun;16(2):187-92. doi: 10.1093/heapol/16.2.187.
4
Predictors of primary health care pharmaceutical expenditure by districts in Uganda and implications for budget setting and allocation.乌干达各地区初级卫生保健药品支出的预测因素及其对预算制定和分配的影响。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Aug 20;15:334. doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-1002-1.
5
Does it matter who you are or what you gain? An experimental study of preferences for resource allocation.你是谁或你获得了什么重要吗?一项关于资源分配偏好的实验研究。
Health Econ. 2003 Apr;12(4):255-67. doi: 10.1002/hec.713.
6
Does expanding fiscal space lead to improved funding of the health sector in developing countries?: lessons from Kenya, Lagos State (Nigeria) and South Africa.扩大财政空间是否会改善发展中国家卫生部门的资金状况?:来自肯尼亚、拉各斯州(尼日利亚)和南非的经验教训。
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1461338. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2018.1461338.
7
Allocating limited resources in a time of fiscal constraints: a priority setting case study from Dalhousie University Faculty of Medicine.在财政紧张时期分配有限资源:来自达尔豪斯大学医学院的优先级设置案例研究。
Acad Med. 2013 Jul;88(7):939-45. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318294fb7e.
8
Achievements and challenges of resource allocation for health in a decentralized system in Tanzania: perspectives of national and district level officers.坦桑尼亚分权系统中卫生资源分配的成就与挑战:国家和地区层面官员的观点
East Afr J Public Health. 2013 Jun;10(2):416-27.
9
Decentralization and health resource allocation: a case study at the district level in Indonesia.权力下放与卫生资源分配:印度尼西亚地区层面的案例研究
World Health Popul. 2007 Dec;9(4):5-16. doi: 10.12927/whp.2007.19514.
10
Delivering on a gendered definition of health needs in local government budgeting: experiences and concepts.在地方政府预算编制中落实基于性别的健康需求定义:经验与理念
Afr Health Sci. 2009 Oct;9 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S90-6.

引用本文的文献

1
Using best-worst scaling to inform policy decisions in Africa: a literature review.运用最佳最差标度法为非洲的政策决策提供信息:文献综述。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Sep 27;24(1):2607. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20068-w.
2
Medical Resource Management in Emergency Hierarchical Diagnosis and Treatment Systems: A Research Framework.急诊分级诊疗体系中的医疗资源管理:一个研究框架
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Jul 8;12(13):1358. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12131358.
3
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Crimean Congo hemorrhagic fever among livestock value chain actors in Kagadi district, Uganda.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of statistical analysis methods for object case best-worst scaling.对象案例最佳最差标度法的统计分析方法比较。
J Med Econ. 2019 Jun;22(6):509-515. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2018.1553781. Epub 2018 Dec 17.
2
Measuring human capital: a systematic analysis of 195 countries and territories, 1990-2016.衡量人力资本:1990-2016 年 195 个国家和地区的系统分析。
Lancet. 2018 Oct 6;392(10154):1217-1234. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31941-X. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
3
Parents' preferences for interventions to improve childhood immunization uptake in northern Nigeria.
乌干达卡加迪区牲畜价值链参与者对克里米亚-刚果出血热的知识、态度和实践。
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2023 Feb 2;17(2):e0011107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011107. eCollection 2023 Feb.
4
Healthworker preparedness for COVID-19 management and implementation experiences: a mixed methods study in Uganda's refugee-hosting districts.卫生工作者对COVID-19管理的准备情况及实施经验:乌干达难民收容区的一项混合方法研究
Confl Health. 2021 Nov 3;15(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s13031-021-00415-z.
尼日利亚北部父母对改善儿童疫苗接种率干预措施的偏好。
Vaccine. 2018 May 11;36(20):2833-2841. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.03.073. Epub 2018 Apr 13.
4
A life-course approach to health: synergy with sustainable development goals.生命历程方法促进健康:与可持续发展目标协同增效。
Bull World Health Organ. 2018 Jan 1;96(1):42-50. doi: 10.2471/BLT.17.198358. Epub 2017 Nov 23.
5
A Systematic Review Comparing the Acceptability, Validity and Concordance of Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling for Eliciting Preferences in Healthcare.系统评价比较离散选择实验和最佳最差量表在医疗保健中偏好 elicitation 的可接受性、有效性和一致性。
Patient. 2018 Jun;11(3):301-317. doi: 10.1007/s40271-017-0288-y.
6
Applying stated-preference methods to improve health systems in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.应用陈述性偏好方法改善撒哈拉以南非洲地区的卫生系统:一项系统评价。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2017 Oct;17(5):441-458. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1375854. Epub 2017 Sep 14.
7
Citizens' preferences on healthcare expenditure allocation: evidence from Greece.公民对医疗保健支出分配的偏好:来自希腊的证据。
Health Expect. 2016 Dec;19(6):1265-1276. doi: 10.1111/hex.12420. Epub 2015 Nov 2.
8
Using Best-Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care.运用最佳-最差标度法研究医疗保健偏好。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Dec;34(12):1195-1209. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5.
9
Using Best-Worst Scaling to Understand Patient Priorities: A Case Example of Papanicolaou Tests for Homeless Women.运用最佳-最差标度法理解患者的优先事项:以针对无家可归女性的巴氏试验为例
Ann Fam Med. 2016 Jul;14(4):359-64. doi: 10.1370/afm.1937.
10
Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force.离散选择实验分析的统计方法:药物经济学与结果研究国际协会联合分析良好研究实践特别工作组报告
Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):300-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. Epub 2016 May 12.