Does performance‐based financing curb stock‐outs of essential medicines? Results from a randomised controlled trial in Cameroon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In 2011, the government of Cameroon launched its performance-based financing (PBF) scheme. Our study examined the effects of the PBF intervention on the availability of essential medicines (EM). METHODS: Randomised control trial whereby PBF and three distinct comparison groups were randomised in a total of 205 health facilities across three regions. Baseline data were collected between March and May 2012 and endline data 36 months later. We defined availability of multiple EM groups by assessing stock-outs for at least one day over the 30 days prior to the survey date and estimated changes attributable to PBF using a series of difference-in-difference regression models, adjusted for relevant facility-level covariates. Data were analysed stratified by region and area to assess effect heterogeneity. RESULTS: Our estimates suggest that PBF intervention had no effect on the stock-outs of antenatal care drugs (P = 0.160), vaccines (P = 0.396), integrated management of childhood illness drugs (P = 0.681) and labour and delivery drugs (P = 0.589). However, the intervention was associated with a significant reduction of 34% in stock-outs of family planning medicines (P = 0.028). We observed effect heterogeneity across regions and areas, with significant decreases in stock-outs of family planning products in North-West region (P = 0.065) and in rural areas (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: The PBF intervention in Cameroon had limited effects on the reduction of EMs stock-outs. These poor results were likely the consequence of partial implementation failure, ranging from disruption and discontinuation of services to limited facility autonomy in managing decision-making and considerable delay in performance payment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".