Case studies in public-private-partnership in health with the focus of enhancing the accessibility of health interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various definitions have been framed for public-private partnerships (PPPs) in health depending on the desired relationship and the characteristics of the respective sectors. These relationships span from a continuum of loose relationships with narrow objectives, lack of a legal status and an absence of a formalized membership or governing body to high level institutionalization. The latter includes concrete objectives, the presence of a legal status and permanent multi-sectoral membership. The study used qualitative research methods including case studies, literature review and interview with key informants. The research undertakes an extensive literature review of various PPP models in health in scale and in scope which are aimed at advancing public health goals in developing countries. The major emphasis is on a qualitative description of some of the PPPs in the planning and implementation phases, including the challenges encountered. This background is used to analyse in-depth two case studies which are both health oriented; the first one is a national level NGO consortium with a focus on malaria and the second one is an international advocacy group with an overarching goal of protecting children against malaria through an innovative mechanism. The case study approach is used to analyze why the PPP approach was used to address malaria control and how it was implemented. Both PPPs demonstrated that relationships between the public and private sector may begin from very humble and loose beginnings. However, with perseverance from committed individuals, a vision and trustworthiness may become powerful advocates for meeting prescribed health agendas. In conclusion, three key themes (trust, sacrifice and championship) run vividly through the case studies and are significant for developing countries to emulate.
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 | 0.064 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".