Challenges of implementing a primary health care strategy in a context of a market‐oriented health care system: the experience of Bogota, Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although Colombia has a health system based on market and neoliberal principles, in 2004, the government of the capital-Bogota-took the decision to formulate a health policy that included the implementation of a comprehensive primary health care (PHC) strategy. This study aims to identify the enablers and barriers to the PHC implementation in Bogota. METHODS: The study used a qualitative multiple case study methodology. Seven Bogota's localities were included. Eighteen semi-structured interviews with key informants (decision-makers at each locality and members of the District Health Secretariat) and fourteen FGDs (one focus group with staff members and one with community members) were carried out. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: The main enablers found across the district and local levels showed a similar pattern, all were related to the good will and commitment of actors at different levels. Barriers included the approach of the national policies and a health system based on neoliberal principles, the lack of a stable funding source, the confusing and rigid guidelines, the high turnover of human resources, the lack of competencies among health workers regarding family focus and community orientation, and the limited involvement of institutions outside the health sector in generating intersectoral responses and promoting community participation. CONCLUSION: Significant efforts are required to overcome the market approach of the national health system. Interventions must be designed to include well-trained and motivated human resources, as well as to establish available and stable financial resources for the PHC strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".