Healthcare financing in Nigeria: A systematic review assessing the evidence of the impact of health insurance on primary health care delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strengthening health systems, improving health outcomes, as well as finding answers to the competing alternatives of healthcare financing are critical issues that continue to bother health policy makers. Irrespective of the options, the choice of health care financing should mobilize resources for health and improve access to quality care at the same time. Notably, the health financing policy in Nigeria provides a framework for establishing health insurance schemes so as to expand coverage in health care delivery for the formal and informal sectors as a strategy towards universal access to healthcare. Accordingly, the authors, through this review, systematically assess the evidence of the extent to which health insurance impacts on access to services and quality of primary healthcare in Nigeria. While this comes to bear, the findings reveal an evidence of moderate-to-high strength that health insurance increases access to care and improves the quality of care received; however, it remains equivocal in some instances. The review therefore contributes to the literature on healthcare financing by extending and qualifying existing knowledge and advocating for accelerated reforms if universal coverage will be achieved.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".