Private Sector An Important But Not Dominant Provider Of Key Health Services In Low- And Middle-Income Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is debate about the role of the private sector in providing services in the health systems of low- and middle-income countries and about how the private sector could help achieve the goal of universal health coverage. Yet the role that the private sector plays in the delivery of health services is poorly understood. Using data for the period 1990-2013 from 205 Demographic and Health Surveys in seventy low- and middle-income countries, I analyzed the use of the private sector for the treatment of diarrhea and of fever or cough in children, for antenatal care, for institutional deliveries, and as a source of modern contraception for women. I found that private providers were the dominant source of treatment for childhood illnesses but not for the other services. I also found no evidence of increased use of the private sector over time. There is tremendous variation in use of the private sector across countries and health services. Urban and wealthier women disproportionately use the private sector, compared to rural and poorer women. The private sector plays an important role in providing coverage, but strategies to further engage the sector, if they are to be effective, will need to take into consideration the variation in its use.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".