The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quality of Private and Public Ambulatory Health Care in Low and Middle Income Countries: Systematic Review of Comparative Studies
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: In developing countries, the private sector provides a substantial proportion of primary health care to low income groups for communicable and non-communicable diseases. These providers are therefore central to improving health outcomes. We need to know how their services compare to those of the public sector to inform policy options. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We summarised reliable research comparing the quality of formal private versus public ambulatory health care in low and middle income countries. We selected studies against inclusion criteria following a comprehensive search, yielding 80 studies. We compared quality under standard categories, converted values to a linear 100% scale, calculated differences between providers within studies, and summarised median values of the differences across studies. As the results for for-profit and not-for-profit providers were similar, we combined them. Overall, median values indicated that many services, irrespective of whether public or private, scored low on infrastructure, clinical competence, and practice. Overall, the private sector performed better in relation to drug supply, responsiveness, and effort. No difference between provider groups was detected for patient satisfaction or competence. Synthesis of qualitative components indicates the private sector is more client centred. CONCLUSIONS: Although data are limited, quality in both provider groups seems poor, with the private sector performing better in drug availability and aspects of delivery of care, including responsiveness and effort, and possibly being more client orientated. Strategies seeking to influence quality in both groups are needed to improve care delivery and outcomes for the poor, including managing the increasing burden of non-communicable diseases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Das, J., & Hammer, J. (2007) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.w338 · Cited by 127
Cited by
Basu, S., Andrews, J., Kishore, S., Panjabi, R., & Stuckler, D. (2012) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001244 · Cited by 845
Lagomarsino, G., Garabrant, A., Adyas, A., Muga, R., & Otoo, N. (2012) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61147-7 · Cited by 644
Understanding and measuring quality of care: dealing with complexity
Hanefeld, J., Powell-Jackson, T., & Balabanova, D. (2017) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.16.179309 · Cited by 351
Putting Quality on the Global Health Agenda
Scott, K. W., & Jha, A. K. (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp1402157 · Cited by 116
Cabieses, B., & Bird, P. (2014) · International Journal of Health Services · doi:10.2190/hs.44.4.j · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Berendes, S., Heywood, P., Oliver, S., & Garner, P.
- Venue
- PLoS Medicine
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-04-12
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e1000433
- ISSN
- 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-1676
- OpenAlex
- W2164872775
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality of Private and Public Ambulatory Health Care in Low and Middle Income Countries: Systematic Review of Comparative Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000433
- The paper
- Berendes, S., Heywood, P., Oliver, S., & Garner, P. (2011). Quality of Private and Public Ambulatory Health Care in Low and Middle Income Countries: Systematic Review of Comparative Studies. PLoS Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000433
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.