https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5444-186X
ABSTRACT
Purpose
Conduct six systematic reviews investigating for-profit private sector roles in NCD prevention and management in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) through our a priori framework’s pillars.
Methods
Six systematic reviews and thematic syntheses were performed between March-August 2021, Six databases, websites of relevant organizations, and references lists of included studies were comprehensively searched. Studies published in English from 2000 onwards involving the pillar of interest, for-profit private sector, NCD prevention/management, and LMIC context were included. Results were synthesized using an inductive thematic synthesis approach.
Results
Ultimately, 25 articles were included in the PPP review, 33 in Governance and Policy, 22 in Healthcare Provision, 15 in Innovation, 14 in Knowledge Educator, and 42 in Investment and Finance. The following themes emerged: PPPs (coordination; financial resources; provision; health promotion; capacity building; innovation; policy); Governance/Policy (lobbying; industry perception; regulation); Healthcare Provision (diagnosis/treatment; infrastructure; availability/accessibility/affordability); Innovation (product innovation; process innovation; marketing innovation; research; innovation dissemination); Knowledge Educator (training; health promotion; industry framework/guideline formation); Investment and Finance (treatment cost; regulation; private insurance; subsidization; direct investment; collaborative financing; innovative financing; research).
Conclusion
These findings will be instrumental for LMICs considering private sector engagement. Potential conflicts of interest must be considered when implementing private sector involvement.
Introduction
Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are a pressing global health issue. In 2019, they were the top cause of death worldwide, resulting in 42.0 million deaths (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation [IHME], Citation2020). The four main types of NCDs are cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancers (neoplasms), chronic respiratory diseases, and diabetes (WHO, Citation2021). Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are disproportionately impacted by NCDs, accruing over three-quarters of global NCD deaths, and 85% of premature deaths from NCDs (WHO, Citation2021). The high rates of death due to NCDs threaten progress towards achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs), specifically 3.4 targeting a 1/3 reduction in premature deaths from NCDs (WHO, Citation2021).
NCD risk factors are multisectoral in origin, including unhealthy diets, physical inactivity, exposure to tobacco smoke, and harmful use of alcohol. Thus, an “all-of-society” approach including the private sector is necessary (Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; WHO, Citation2021). The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013–2020 suggests that multi-stakeholder engagement including the private sector is required for effective NCD prevention and management (WHO, Citation2013). Furthermore, the U.N. Political Declaration of the High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of NCDs recommended engaging non-health actors and key stakeholders, including the private sector, in collaborative partnerships to promote health and reduce NCD risk factors (U.N. General Assembly, Citation2012).
The private sector plays a significant role in health systems as a solution to challenges including changes in disease burdens, budgetary constraints, and demographic shifts (Clarke & Paviza, Citation2018). Over time, the private for-profit sector specifically has situated itself as a driver of innovation and provider of high-quality healthcare, contributing to the provision of health-related services and products, funding and investment, workforce training, and infrastructure support (Clarke & Paviza, Citation2018; Clarke et al., Citation2019).
There is a lack of evidence and guidance, however, regarding the role that the for-profit private sector can play in NCD prevention and management (Clarke et al., Citation2019). To fill this gap, we previously developed an a priori framework outlining how the private for-profit sector is involved in NCD prevention and management. The framework contains 6 pillars: public-private partnerships (PPPs); governance and policy; healthcare provision; innovation; knowledge educator; investment and finance. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review for each pillar to better understand how the private sector acts within these roles, specifically in an LMIC context.
Methods
Six different systematic reviews were conducted, all of which are reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). No protocol was prepared.
Search strategy
Comprehensive searches of Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ProQuest ABI/Inform, and Business Source Premier were conducted in March 2021 for each of the six reviews. Websites of the following relevant organizations were also searched in April-July 2021 to identify grey literature: WHO, World Bank, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), American Cancer Society, NCD Alliance, Union for International Cancer Control (UICC), Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), World Economic Forum, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Harvard School of Public Health, United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Medtronic, Astra Zeneca, Novo Nordisk, Rabin Martin, C3, and Merck. Results were filtered to only include articles published from the year 2000 onwards, in English.
A search strategy including the phrases “private sector”, “framework pillar of interest” and “NCDs” was formulated and administered, which is available in Appendix A.
Study selection
Studies were considered for inclusion if their focus was the framework pillar of interest, the for-profit private sector, and NCD prevention and management in an LMIC context. News articles, press releases, presentations, or articles unavailable as full text were excluded. Covidence Software (2021) was used for screening by one reviewer in each review. Reference lists of included studies were additionally screened for relevant studies.
Data extraction
One reviewer conducted data extraction using Covidence Software (2021) and a pre-piloted data extraction form for each review. The complete data extraction form is available in Appendix B.
Quality assessment
The quality of each study was evaluated by the same reviewer using the tool developed by Hawker et al (Hawker et al., Citation2002). which assesses nine areas for quality: abstract and titles; introduction and aims; method and data; sampling; data analysis; ethics and bias; results; transferability and generalizability; implication and usefulness. Each section was awarded a score of 4=good, 3=fair, 2=poor, or 1=very poor. Values were added up to provide a total score, which corresponds to a letter grade: 30-36=A=high quality; 24-29=B=medium quality; 9-24=C=low quality.
Data synthesis
An inductive thematic synthesis method was used (Thomas & Harden, Citation2008). Extracted data was systematically coded in accordance with its meaning to translate findings into a universal code. Codes were then categorized to elucidate overarching themes that existed in the included studies for each review. These themes were used to answer the proposed research question regarding the private sector’s role in NCD prevention and management in LMICs.
Patient and public involvement
Neither patients nor public were involved in the design, conduct, reporting, or dissemination plans of our research.
Results
Following the removal of duplicates, 302 articles were screened for inclusion in the PPP review, 1496 for Governance and Policy, 1747 for Healthcare Provision, 2162 for Innovation, 1462 for Knowledge Educator, and 3070 for Investment and Finance (). Of these, 102 underwent full-text screening in the PPP review, 161 in Governance and Policy, 361 in Healthcare Provision, 314 in Innovation, 242 in Knowledge Educator, and 147 in Investment and Finance. Ultimately, 25 articles were included in the PPP review, 33 in Governance and Policy, 22 in Healthcare Provision, 15 in Innovation, 14 in Knowledge Educator, and 42 in Investment and Finance. Appendix C contains characteristics of the included studies.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagrams for each of the 6 systematic reviews.
Several themes were elucidated in each review that describe the for-profit private sector’s role in NCD prevention and management in LMICs.
Public-private partnerships
In the PPP review, seven themes were elucidated: coordination; provision; financial resources; health promotion; innovation; capacity building; policy ().
Table I. Themes and their associated sub-themes and components elucidated in each of the six systematic reviews conducted. These themes and sub-themes describe the private sector’s role in NCD prevention and management through each of the review topics.
Coordination
Coordination includes how PPPs coordinate the private and public sectors to produce the most beneficial result. This occurs through aligning private and public sector goals (Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Kraak et al., Citation2012; UNICEF, Citation2020; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018) and leveraging the skills and expertise from both sectors, specifically complimenting areas the public sector lacks (Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Ota et al., Citation2018; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Silva et al., Citation2017; Thow, Verma, etal., Citation2018; UNICEF, Citation2019, Citation2020; WHO, Citation2016, Citation2019; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013). Transactional partnerships build mutually beneficial relationships through compatible goals, advancing each partner’s agenda (Kraak et al., Citation2012).
Financial resources
The private sector provides financial resources through PPPs directed towards NCD mitigation efforts. PPPs mobilize resources that finance NCD interventions, programming, infrastructure, and research (Alizadeh et al., Citation2020; Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance, Citation2017; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Kraak et al., Citation2012; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Ota et al., Citation2018; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019, Citation2020; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013). Philanthropic partnerships facilitate financial donations from private partners (Kraak et al., Citation2012). Transformational partnerships are more complex, with greater resource investment such that partner cultures and practices are influenced (Kraak et al., Citation2012).
Provision
The theme of provision pertains to private partners within PPPs aiding in the provision of affordable and high-quality treatment and services for NCDs. This is through the donation of treatment and service, or contractual agreements. PPPs increase access to safe, effective, and affordable NCD medication and health technology (Das et al., Citation2017; Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Shannon et al., Citation2019; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018). They do this by reforming the market, storage, and supply chain by involving private partners like the pharmaceutical industry (Thow, Verma, etal., Citation2018). Strategies encouraging private sector participation, like PPPs, can also yield higher quality NCD-related health services by increasing coverage and quality of NCD screening, diagnosis, and treatment (Alizadeh et al., Citation2020; Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Shannon et al., Citation2019; Trager, Citation2020).
Health promotion
Health promotion includes public education about NCDs and their risk factors and promoting healthier habits. Through PPPs the private sector facilitates population education interventions regarding NCD screening, prevention, treatment, and diagnosis (Kraak et al., Citation2012; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Shannon et al., Citation2019) encourages physical activity (Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance, Citation2017; Silva et al., Citation2017; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013) and improves access to nutritious foods (Thow, Verma, etal., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2013). This upstream approach helps improve NCD burdens in LMICs through prevention.
Capacity building
Capacity building includes training healthcare professionals in NCD mitigation techniques. Through PPPs the private sector facilitates training sessions that disseminate private sector skills, improving quality and capacity of local health systems for NCD mitigation (Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Ota et al., Citation2018; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Shannon et al., Citation2019; WHO, Citation2013). PPPs provide capacity support and implementation research which improve NCD service delivery (Johnson et al., Citation2018).
Innovation
Innovation includes research and the distribution of technology relating to NCDs. Through PPPs, private partners facilitate data sharing, contribute to NCD-related research initiatives (Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Silva et al., Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018) and facilitate access to innovative NCD-related technology (Johnson et al., Citation2018; Kraak et al., Citation2012; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018).
Policy
The private sector plays a role in shaping policies relating to NCD prevention and management. Through PPPs, the private sector is given an enhanced opportunity to contribute to policy discussions that will govern NCD mitigation strategies globally and in LMICs, although this involvement is heavily prone to conflicts of interest (Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015).
Governance and policy
In the Governance and Policy review, three themes were elucidated: lobbying; industry perception; regulation ().
Lobbying
The private sector lobbies governments and other governing bodies. These efforts include industries fighting policy implementation (Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Casswell, Citation2019; Coriakula et al., Citation2018; Gortmaker et al., Citation2012; Gómez, Citation2019; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Mariath & Martins, Citation2020; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Oladepo et al., Citation2018; Sanni et al., Citation2018; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019; Thow, Greenberg, etal., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2020, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015) applying legal strategies such as litigation (George, Citation2018; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2021; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019) and acting as policy influencers in the policymaking process (Buse et al., Citation2017; Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Mialon et al., Citation2020; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Suzuki et al., Citation2021; Thow, Greenberg, etal., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015). Lobbying also includes the infiltration of government representation through relationship building and financial incentives (Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Casswell, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Gómez, Citation2019; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019) and collaboration through methods like PPPs (Bergman et al., Citation2012; Buse et al., Citation2017; Casswell, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2021; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; WHO, Citation2016). Lobbying activities can shape the NCD-related governance and policy environment.
Industry perception
Public and government perception of industries impacts NCD-related governance and policies involving the private sector, and their level of involvement in policymaking. The private sector thus attempts to control this perception through framing (including corporate social responsibility activities, media capture, hiring prominent experts) (Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Gómez, Citation2019; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Oladepo et al., Citation2018; Suzuki et al., Citation2021; Thow, Greenberg, etal., Citation2018) shaping scientific evidence that informs policies (George, Citation2018; Gómez, Citation2019; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019) and emphasizing industry’s economic importance (Carriedo et al., Citation2021; George, Citation2018; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Thow, Verma, etal., Citation2018, Thow, Greenberg, etal., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015). This paints the private sector in a more positive light and as important stakeholders in economies and NCD policy to preserve their involvement in policy discussions and limit regulations.
Regulation
Regulation involves the governance strategies in place that aim to improve NCD burdens within countries by regulating potentially harmful activities and products. The private sector plays a role in their own regulation via voluntary self-regulation and company-mandated policies (Buse et al., Citation2017; Casswell, Citation2013; Cetthakrikul et al., Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Lauber et al., Citation2020; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Sacks et al., Citation2015; Suzuki et al., Citation2021; WHO, Citation2020). The private sector also, however, employs strategies to avoid regulation implemented by other governing bodies (Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; Bhojani et al., Citation2014; Coriakula et al., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2021).
Healthcare provision
In the Healthcare Provision review, three themes were elucidated: availability, accessibility, and affordability; diagnosis and treatment; infrastructure ().
Diagnosis and treatment
Diagnosis and treatment (therapy) refers to the role of the private sector in diagnosing and treating NCDs in LMICs. The private sector is the main provider of primary healthcare services for NCD treatment in many LMICs (Berendes et al., Citation2011; Bigdeli et al., Citation2016; Elias et al., Citation2018; Mukherjee et al., Citation2011). They are often depended on for more specialized NCD care (Elias et al., Citation2018; Lewis et al., Citation2015; Pandian et al., Citation2007) are more likely to diagnose and manage NCDs compared to public health systems (Cataife, Citation2012) and have a greater ability to provide access to necessary medications (Bhuvan et al., Citation2019; Bissell et al., Citation2016; Syed et al., Citation2018).
Infrastructure
The private sector in LMICs contributes to NCD management by offering infrastructure such as hospitals, laboratories for testing, and pharmacies beyond those offered by the government (Angwenyi et al., Citation2020; Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; Polanczyk & Ribeiro, Citation2009; Rawal et al., Citation2020; Wearne et al., Citation2019). Private sector infrastructure is also often more equipped and ready to provide general and more specialized NCD-related care (Angwenyi et al., Citation2020; Bhojani et al., Citation2012; Bintabara et al., Citation2018; Cataife, Citation2012; Polanczyk & Ribeiro, Citation2009; Smith & Rabadan-Diehl, Citation2016; Wearne et al., Citation2019).
Availability, accessibility, and affordability
The role of the private sector in healthcare provision increases the availability and accessibility of NCD services in LMICs (Agarwal, Citation2005; Ashigbie et al., Citation2020; Atre, Citation2015; Bhojani et al., Citation2012; Mukherjee et al., Citation2011; Musinguzi et al., Citation2015; Wearne et al., Citation2019). This increased availability is often less affordable (Balasubramaniam et al., Citation2014; Subramanian et al., Citation2018; Wirtz et al., Citation2018) however, the private sector is involved in other initiatives that aim to improve affordability such as private medical insurance or mitigating the cost of treatment or transport (Abraham et al., Citation2009). The availability of generic and originator medicines in private pharmacies provide patients the opportunity to buy medications within their budget (Dabare et al., Citation2014).
Innovation
In the Innovation review, five themes were elucidated: product innovation; process innovation; marketing innovation; research; innovation dissemination ().
Product innovation
Product innovation involves the introduction of new or significantly improved goods or services for NCD prevention and management (i.e., polypills, improved distribution methods) (Hancock et al., Citation2011; Nari Kahle et al., Citation2013; Plum et al., Citation2020; U.S. Department of State, Citation2011) and development of new health information or communication technology systems to improve data collection and monitoring (Doshi et al., Citation2021; Engelgau et al., Citation2016; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Global Systems for Mobile Communications, Citation2019; Rouleau et al., Citation2017; Shuvo et al., Citation2015; WHO, Citation2008). It also involves anticipating NCD-related needs and developing innovative technology that meets them (da Cruz Paula et al., Citation2020) and the upgrading of existing tools, devices, and technology to enhance services (Checkley et al., Citation2014; IFC, Citation2011; U.S. Department of State, Citation2011).
Process innovation
Process innovation pertains to the implementation of new or improved production or delivery methods by the private sector. This involves novel models of care that increases outreach for NCDs through novel service delivery packages (Allotey et al., Citation2014; Herzlinger, Citation2006; van de Vijver et al., Citation2013) and innovative private health insurance programs that include health promotion interventions (El-Sayed et al., Citation2015; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013).
Marketing innovation
Marketing innovation is the implementation of new marketing methods with significant changes in aspects such as product design, packaging, placement, promotion, or pricing. In LMICs, the private sector has innovated ways to tailor NCD services and their prices depending on the socioeconomic status of countries so as to improve accessibility and affordability (AstraZeneca, Citation2021; Nari Kahle et al., Citation2013; Novo Nordisk, Citation2017; Rockers et al., Citation2019; Shannon et al., Citation2019; U.S. Department of State, Citation2011).
Research
Research is an important process in innovation. Basic and applied research are two processes through which new and/or significantly improved services/products are created and channelled into technological innovations (Omachonu & Einspruch, Citation2010). The private sector is heavily involved in research that is novel in nature, providing monetary or in-kind (participants, laboratories, data, expertise) support (Grancelli, Citation2005; Saldarriaga et al., Citation2017; Medtronic Foundation Citationn.d.). Research capacity in LMICs is poor (Engelgau et al., Citation2016) thus the private sector supporting research are additionally contributing to capacity building (Engelgau et al., Citation2016; Medtronic Foundation Citationn.d.).
Innovation dissemination
Innovation dissemination explains how a new product or idea gains momentum over time and diffuses within a population or social system (Dearing & Cox, Citation2018). When promoting innovation, one must understand the target population and any factors that facilitate or hinder its adoption. The private sector may fund publications to ensure research reaches a greater audience (Tzeel, Citation2011) or provide educational grants to promote involvement in research studies (Evert et al., Citation2019).
Knowledge educator
In the Knowledge Educator review, three themes were elucidated: training; health promotion; industry framework and guideline formation ().
Training
The private sector contributes knowledge regarding NCD prevention and management through the provision of training. Research is an integral component of combating NCDs in LMICs, but research capacity is suboptimal (Bloomfield et al., Citation2016; Ebrahim et al., Citation2013; Malekzadeh et al., Citation2020). Private sector investment in research capacity (Bloomfield et al., Citation2016; Engelgau et al., Citation2016; Malekzadeh et al., Citation2020) and provision of training and mentorship to local researchers (Engelgau et al., Citation2016) are fundamental in addressing NCDs. LMICs also often have limited healthcare providers available to combat NCDs (Joshi et al., Citation2014; Pastakia et al., Citation2020; Pati et al., Citation2020) thus the private sector has provided training to healthcare providers for knowledge and skill advancement, and the use of new medical devices and processes (Merck , Citation2021; Pastakia et al., Citation2020; Ratzan et al., Citation2013; AVON Global Scholars, Citationn.d.; Reeves, Citation2011).
Health promotion
Health promotion is the process of enabling people to increase control over and improve their own health by equipping them with the skills and capabilities to do so (Dobe, Citation2012; Pati et al., Citation2020). The private sector has promoted health through educational programs that remove barriers to accessing health information and improve awareness (Laar et al., Citation2019; Novo Nordisk, Citation2017; Ratzan et al., Citation2013) and programs that increase access to healthy activities and health knowledge (Patel et al., Citation2010).
Industry framework and guideline formation
The private sector circulates knowledge within the healthcare industry to optimize diagnosis and treatment based on the latest research. Educating healthcare providers on international guidelines and standards is an effective way of improving patient care (Pfizer, Citation2020). The private sector also contributes to the development of standard protocols based on emerging research for NCD management to ultimately improve health-seeking behaviour and adherence (AB InBev, Citation2018; Abdool-Gaffar et al., Citation2011; Ahmed et al., Citation2015; AstraZeneca, Citation2021; Laar et al., Citation2019; Pati et al., Citation2020; Ratzan et al., Citation2013).
Investment and finance
In the final review, Investment and Finance, eight themes were elucidated: cost of treatment; regulation; insurance; subsidization; direct investment; collaborative financing; innovative financing; research ().
Cost of treatment
The cost of NCD treatment and services in LMICs greatly impacts financing of NCD control and management through financial accessibility and protection. The private sector impacts this through the high (Anson et al., Citation2012; Ashigbie et al., Citation2020; Beran et al., Citation2019; Cameron et al., Citation2009; Khuluza & Haefele-Abah, Citation2019; Ladusingh et al., Citation2018; Lekshmi et al., Citation2014; Mendis et al., Citation2007; Rahman et al., Citation2013; Sado & Sufa, Citation2016; Singh et al., Citation2016; Subramanian et al., Citation2018; Tripathy & Prasad, Citation2018; Tusubira et al., Citation2020; van Mourik et al., Citation2010; World Bank, Citation2013) and variable (Armstrong-Hough et al., Citation2020) prices at which services and treatments are provided, as well as the extent of out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure (Dugee et al., Citation2018; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Ladusingh et al., Citation2018; Rahman et al., Citation2013; Tripathy & Prasad, Citation2018; World Bank, Citation2013) at private facilities. LMICs in which prices did not vary considerably between public and private facilities had national price control strategies (Heidari et al., Citation2019). Pricing along the supply chain and manufacturing process (Cameron et al., Citation2009; FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Holt et al., Citation2017; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Mendis et al., Citation2007; van Mourik et al., Citation2010) and retail mark-ups (Cameron et al., Citation2009; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Mendis et al., Citation2007; Mhlanga & Suleman, Citation2014) further contribute to these prices, and negatively impact NCD financing. Addressing these excessive mark-ups through regulation strategies will help bring patient prices down (van Mourik et al., Citation2010).
Regulation
Regulation strategies involving the private sector impact the financing of NCD control and management by improving financial affordability and protection and generating revenue. Private sector self-regulation and adherence to guidelines limits prices (Cameron et al., Citation2009; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; You et al., Citation2019) while taxes on products generates revenue from the private sector while encouraging NCD-friendly changes (FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Mendis & Chestnov, Citation2013; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020). It is important to consider, however, that limiting private sector prices could be a disincentive for stocking products and thus have an adverse effect on availability (Cameron et al., Citation2009).
Health insurance
Private health insurance is both a facilitator and barrier to accessing NCD care (Tusubira et al., Citation2020). It improves financial protection regarding NCD treatment and service (El-Saharty et al., Citation2013; Holt et al., Citation2017; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Rahman et al., Citation2013) while relieving financial pressures on public health systems (Cattaneo & Piemonte, Citation2021; Dutta & Ly, Citation2018; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012). Private insurance can also be expensive, however, which may be a barrier to affordable NCD care (El-Saharty et al., Citation2013; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020). NCD and population ageing trends could impact private insurance company business models should they be required to pay out associated expensive insurance claims, thus these industries are interested in exploring risk management interventions (Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017).
Subsidization
Subsidization of products and services by the private sector improves affordability of services and treatments that contribute to NCD mitigation (Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; World Bank, Citation2013). Improving the prices and providing incentives improves engagement and participation in NCD mitigation interventions (Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017).
Direct investment
The private sector directly invests in NCD control and management programming to support interventions and purchase new equipment (Allen, Citation2017; El-Saharty et al., Citation2013). Overcoming barriers to private investment and leveraging private sector funds will unleash critical new flow of capital to catalyse NCD service delivery (Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020) fill financing gaps for quality NCD care caused by limited domestic spending (El-Saharty et al., Citation2013; Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018) curtail future health costs (Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017) and offer more innovative products and solutions to NCDs (Bloom et al., Citation2011; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Jones, Citation2021). This can be done through corporate social responsibility initiatives (Jones, Citation2021; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020) and investment in “best buys” (Bloom et al., Citation2011; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018).
Collaborative financing
The private sector can collaborate with other sectors to mobilize funding for NCD initiatives, which aligns objectives and ensures the even distribution of funding (Allen, Citation2017; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Jones, Citation2021; Mendis & Chestnov, Citation2013; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019; WHO, Citation2019). PPPs specifically leverage private and public investment to support NCD programming (Allen, Citation2017; Dutta & Ly, Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018; UNICEF, Citation2019).
Innovative financing
Innovative financing mechanisms leverage private funding for NCD programming through a plethora of paths. These programs provide innovative incentives and platforms for funding, and reduce risk of investment for private partners to improve engagement and ultimately support for NCD mitigation programming (Allen, Citation2017; Jones, Citation2021; van Mourik et al., Citation2010; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2021). Programs include development bonds (Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018) development bank lending (Jones, Citation2021; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018) and multi-donor trust funds (MDTFs) (UNICEF, Citation2019; WHO, Citation2019).
Research
Private sector development of new originator brand products protected by intellectual property rights impede attempts to improve medicine affordability, preventing largescale distribution of affordable generic options (Beran et al., Citation2019; Cameron et al., Citation2009; Heidari et al., Citation2019; Khuluza & Haefele-Abah, Citation2019; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Lekshmi et al., Citation2014; Mendis et al., Citation2007; Mhlanga & Suleman, Citation2014; van Mourik et al., Citation2010; You et al., Citation2019). Permitting generics to be produced and sold and engaging private sector generic manufacturers will lower prices of available NCD medicines (Kishore et al., Citation2015; van Mourik et al., Citation2010). The private sector also invests directly in research to support innovation and developments in NCD control and management (FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Schmutz et al., Citation2019). It has been observed, however that publications sponsored exclusively by food and beverage companies are more likely to have conclusions favourable to the sponsoring company (Moodie et al., Citation2013).
Quality assessment
PPPs
Five studies were considered high quality (Das et al., Citation2017; Kraak et al., Citation2012; Ota et al., Citation2018; Shannon et al., Citation2019; Thow, Verma, etal., Citation2018) nine medium quality (Alizadeh et al., Citation2020; Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance, Citation2017; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Silva et al., Citation2017; UNICEF, Citation2020; WHO, Citation2016) and eleven low quality (Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2019; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013) (Appendix D). Studies were primarily downgraded for incomplete description of methods and data (Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Silva et al., Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019, Citation2020; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2016, Citation2019; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013) incomplete description of sampling (Alizadeh et al., Citation2020; Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019; WHO, Citation2019) incomplete description of data analysis (Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance, Citation2017; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Kraak et al., Citation2012; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Ota et al., Citation2018; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Silva et al., Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019, Citation2020; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2016, Citation2019; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013) and insufficient mention of ethics and bias (Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011; Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance, Citation2017; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011; Johnson et al., Citation2018; Jones, Citation2021; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Oluwole & Kraemer, Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Silva et al., Citation2017; Trager, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019, Citation2020; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2016, Citation2019; World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013).
Governance & policy
Seventeen studies were considered high quality (Bhojani et al., Citation2014; Buse et al., Citation2017; Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Cetthakrikul et al., Citation2019; Coriakula et al., Citation2018; Gómez, Citation2019; Jaichuen et al., Citation2018; Lauber et al., Citation2020; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Oladepo et al., Citation2018; Sacks et al., Citation2015; Sanni et al., Citation2018; Suzuki et al., Citation2021; Thow, Greenberg, etal., Citation2018) five medium quality (Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; WHO, Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015) and eleven low quality (Bergman et al., Citation2012; Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Gortmaker et al., Citation2012; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Mariath & Martins, Citation2020; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019) (Appendix D). Studies were primarily downgraded for insufficient mention of ethics and bias (Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; Bergman et al., Citation2012; Buse et al., Citation2017; Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; Cetthakrikul et al., Citation2019; Gortmaker et al., Citation2012; Gómez, Citation2019; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Lauber et al., Citation2020; Mariath & Martins, Citation2020; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Sacks et al., Citation2015; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019; Thow, Greenberg, et al., Citation2018; WHO, Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015) incomplete description of methods and data (Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; Bergman et al., Citation2012; Bhojani et al., Citation2014; Buse et al., Citation2017; Carriedo et al., Citation2021; Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Gortmaker et al., Citation2012; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Mariath & Martins, Citation2020; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2021; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019; WHO, Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015) and incomplete description of data analysis (Ben Romdhane et al., Citation2015; Bergman et al., Citation2012; Buse et al., Citation2017; Casswell, Citation2013, Citation2019; George, Citation2018; Gortmaker et al., Citation2012; Khayatzadeh-Mahani et al., Citation2018; Mariath & Martins, Citation2020; Mialon & Da Silva Gomes, Citation2019; Mialon et al., Citation2021; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015; Myers et al., Citation2017; Tangcharoensathien et al., Citation2019; WHO, Citation2016, Citation2020, Citation2021; Williams, Citation2015).
Healthcare provision
Nine studies were considered high quality, six medium quality, and seven low quality (Appendix D). Studies were primarily downgraded for insufficient mention of ethics and bias (Abraham et al., Citation2009; Agarwal, Citation2005; Ashigbie et al., Citation2020; Atre, Citation2015; Balasubramaniam et al., Citation2014; Bhojani et al., Citation2012; Bissell et al., Citation2016; Cataife, Citation2012; Dabare et al., Citation2014; Mukherjee et al., Citation2011; Pandian et al., Citation2007; Polanczyk & Ribeiro, Citation2009; Rawal et al., Citation2020, Citation2020; Subramanian et al., Citation2018; Syed et al., Citation2018; Wearne et al., Citation2019; Wirtz et al., Citation2018) and incomplete description of sampling (Abraham et al., Citation2009; Agarwal, Citation2005; Ashigbie et al., Citation2020; Atre, Citation2015; Balasubramaniam et al., Citation2014; Bhojani et al., Citation2012; Bissell et al., Citation2016; Cataife, Citation2012; Dabare et al., Citation2014; Pandian et al., Citation2007; Polanczyk & Ribeiro, Citation2009; Subramanian et al., Citation2018; Syed et al., Citation2018; Wearne et al., Citation2019).
Innovation
Five studies were considered high quality, three medium quality, and seven low quality (Appendix D). Studies were primarily downgraded for insufficient mention of ethics and bias (AstraZeneca, Citation2021; da Cruz Paula et al., Citation2020; Doshi et al., Citation2021; Evert et al., Citation2019; Medtronic Foundation Citationn.d.; Grancelli, Citation2005; Hancock et al., Citation2011; IFC, Citation2011; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Rockers et al., Citation2019; Saldarriaga et al., Citation2017; Shannon et al., Citation2019; Tzeel, Citation2011; U.S. Department of State, Citation2011; van de Vijver et al., Citation2013) and incomplete description of sampling (AstraZeneca, Citation2021; Doshi et al., Citation2021; Evert et al., Citation2019; Hancock et al., Citation2011; IFC, Citation2011; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Saldarriaga et al., Citation2017; Shannon et al., Citation2019; Tzeel, Citation2011; U.S. Department of State, Citation2011; van de Vijver et al., Citation2013; Medtronic Foundation Citationn.d.).
Knowledge educator
Four studies were considered high quality, three medium quality, and seven low quality (Appendix D). Studies were primarily downgraded for insufficient mention of ethics and bias (AB InBev, Citation2018; Abdool-Gaffar et al., Citation2011; AVON Global Scholars Citationn.d.; AstraZeneca, Citation2021; Laar et al., Citation2019; Malekzadeh et al., Citation2020; Merck , Citation2021; Novo Nordisk, Citation2017; Pastakia et al., Citation2020; Patel et al., Citation2010; Pfizer, Citation2020; Ratzan et al., Citation2013; Reeves, Citation2011) and incomplete description of sampling (AB InBev, Citation2018; Abdool-Gaffar et al., Citation2011; AVON Global Scholars Citationn.d.; Ahmed et al., Citation2015; AstraZeneca, Citation2021; Laar et al., Citation2019; Malekzadeh et al., Citation2020; Merck , Citation2021; Novo Nordisk, Citation2017; Pastakia et al., Citation2020; Pfizer, Citation2020; Ratzan et al., Citation2013; Reeves, Citation2011).
Investment and finance
Sixteen studies were considered high quality (Anson et al., Citation2012; Armstrong-Hough et al., Citation2020; Ashigbie et al., Citation2020; Cameron et al., Citation2009; Dugee et al., Citation2018; Heidari et al., Citation2019; Khuluza & Haefele-Abah, Citation2019; Mendis et al., Citation2007; Mhlanga & Suleman, Citation2014; Rahman et al., Citation2013; Sado & Sufa, Citation2016; Singh et al., Citation2016; Subramanian et al., Citation2018; Tripathy & Prasad, Citation2018; Tusubira et al., Citation2020; van Mourik et al., Citation2010) twelve medium quality (Allen, Citation2017; Bloom et al., Citation2011; FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Jones, Citation2021; Ladusingh et al., Citation2018; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Lekshmi et al., Citation2014; Mendis & Chestnov, Citation2013; Schmutz et al., Citation2019; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020; World Bank, Citation2013; You et al., Citation2019) and fourteen low quality Prescott and Stibbe (Citation2017), WHO (Citation2013), Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) (Citation2020) (Cattaneo & Piemonte, Citation2021, Citation2021; Clarke & Paviza, Citation2018; Dutta & Ly, Citation2018; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Holt et al., Citation2017; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018; UNICEF, Citation2019) (Appendix D). Studies were mainly downgraded due to incomplete descriptions of data analysis (Allen, Citation2017; Beran et al., Citation2019; Cattaneo & Piemonte, Citation2021; Dutta & Ly, Citation2018; El-Saharty et al., Citation2013; FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Jones, Citation2021; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Lambert & Kolbe-Alexander, Citation2013; Mendis & Chestnov, Citation2013; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2019; World Bank, Citation2013) and incomplete descriptions of ethics and bias (Anson et al., Citation2012; Armstrong-Hough et al., Citation2020; Beran et al., Citation2019; Bloom et al., Citation2011; Cameron et al., Citation2009; Cattaneo & Piemonte, Citation2021; Dugee et al., Citation2018; Dutta & Ly, Citation2018; El-Saharty et al., Citation2013; FAO & UNICEF, Citation2020; Ganju et al., Citation2020; Heidari et al., Citation2019; Holt et al., Citation2017; Jones, Citation2021; Kanzler & Ng, Citation2012; Kishore et al., Citation2015; Ladusingh et al., Citation2018; Lekshmi et al., Citation2014; Mendis & Chestnov, Citation2013; Mendis et al., Citation2007; Moodie et al., Citation2013; Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017; Schmutz et al., Citation2019; Shellaby & Henshall, Citation2018; The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC, Citation2020; UNICEF, Citation2019; van Mourik et al., Citation2010; WHO, Citation2013, Citation2019; World Bank, Citation2013; You et al., Citation2019).
Discussion
The aim of this study was to elucidate the for-profit private sector’s roles in NCD prevention and management in LMICs through the six pillars outlined in our framework. A thematic synthesis approach allowed for the elucidation and categorization of these roles. These findings will be instrumental for LMICs considering engagement with the private sector, and who are facing an increased presence of these industries in the field of NCD prevention and management.
The private sector’s roles via PPPs involved: coordination (align goals, leverage expertise), financial resources, provision (medicine and service provision), health promotion (health education, physical activity, nutrition), capacity building (training), innovation (research, technology), and policy (policy influencer). There was a lack of examples of PPPs in LMICs with the private sector having a role in science, technology, and innovation (STI) research for NCD prevention and management. This suggests an area to consider for future PPPs. Many governments and the UN promote PPPs to combat NCDs, but the evidence of unhealthy commodity industry involvement delivering health benefits is lacking, as PPPs are sometimes used as delaying tactics to prevent stronger regulation (Jaichuen et al., Citation2018).
In terms of Governance and Policy, the themes included: lobbying (fight policy, legal strategies, policy influencer, government infiltration, collaboration), industry perception (framing, shape evidence, economic importance), and regulation (self-regulation, evade regulation). The private sector plays an influential role in the proliferation of NCD-related policies that impact LMICs. Industries often aim to create policy environments favouring their business model at the cost of NCD mitigation. With practices like lobbying becoming increasingly influential in middle-income countries (Williams, Citation2015) it is important to ensure regulation and transparency. The private sector holds substantial power in governance and policy, which could positively impact NCD control and management if industries are motivated to do so (i.e., incentives, clear shifts in public demand). Currently, evidence suggests that the private sector more detrimental to NCD-related governance and policy than beneficial.
The private sector’s roles in Healthcare Provision fell under the themes of diagnosis and treatment, infrastructure, and availability, accessibility, and affordability. In LMICs, due to limited supply of health products and services, individuals must utilize the private sector. The private sector often provides healthcare services that are missing in public healthcare, however, the care provided in the private sector is more expensive and patients must often decide between paying high OOP expenses or forgoing recommended treatment (Armstrong-Hough et al., Citation2020; Balasubramaniam et al., Citation2014; Bissell et al., Citation2016; Kasonde et al., Citation2019; Mhlanga & Suleman, Citation2014; Musinguzi et al., Citation2015; van de Vijver et al., Citation2013). Individuals opt to go to private facilities for NCD care due to perceived higher quality or because required services were not available in public centres (Atre, Citation2015; Rawal et al., Citation2020; Tusubira et al., Citation2020).
Regarding Innovation, the private sector’s roles fell under the themes product innovation (medications, HIT and ICT, technology, upgrade of existing technologies), process innovation (increasing outreach, private health insurance), marketing innovation (tailoring services), research, and innovation dissemination. Innovations by the private sector not only improve a process, product, or marketing, but also reach a new set of consumers in LMICs due to tailoring (Bhattacharyya et al., Citation2010; Parikh, Citation2013).
The roles of the private sector as knowledge educators in NCD prevention and management fell under the following themes: training (building research capacity, building health workforce capacity), health promotion (awareness, accessibility), and industry framework and guideline formation. The role in education transcends awareness and builds the capacity of available in-country resources to operate effectively. Awareness alone does not lead to behavioural changes (Pati et al., Citation2020).
Lastly, private sector roles in investment and finance included: cost of treatment (high prices, OOP expenditures, supply chain/manufacturer pricing, mark-ups), regulation, private insurance, subsidization, direct investment, collaborative financing (multi-sector collaboration, PPPs), innovative financing (innovative programs, development bonds, development bank lending, MDTFs), and research (originators vs. generics, funding). The private sector plays a role in NCD investment and financing that is both positive and negative, contributing to high costs and lack of affordability, while subsidizing some costs and providing capital to fund initiatives. The positive roles of the private sector appear to outnumber the negatives, and with adequate regulatory measures the private sector will be a constructive influence on NCD prevention and management in LMICs.
Conflicts of interest
While the private sector fills many roles in NCD mitigation, their involvement is complex and prone to conflicts of interest (COIs), especially industries involved in unhealthy commodities (Silva et al., Citation2017). The commercial activities, strategies, and actions that the private sector uses to promote their products affect the health of populations and are termed commercial determinants of health (Kickbusch et al., Citation2016; World Health Organization, Citation2021). These determinants impact a diverse range of health outcomes that pertain to NCDs, such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular health, and cancer, while also exacerbating pre-existing health disparities that exist (World Health Organization, Citation2021). LMICs are for example more vulnerable to the commercial determinants of health and face greater pressure from the private sector (World Health Organization, Citation2021). The venues through which the private sector enacts these commercial determinants of health align with those listed in this review, such as marketing, lobbying, social responsibility strategies, extensive supply chains, highlighting the COIs that persist with private sector involvement (Kickbusch et al., Citation2016).
PPPs involve shared decision-making powers amongst partners, allowing private partners to play a role in decisions concerning NCD agendas, goals, strategies, resources, and responsibilities (WHO, Citation2016). As a result, some governments, NGOs, researchers, and professionals are hesitant to enter partnerships with the private sector due to potential COIs (Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011). Governance (Goroff & Reich, Citation2010; Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011) accountability mechanisms (WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018) contracts (World Economic Forum & PAHO, Citation2013) organizational structures (Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011) transparency (Hawkes & Buse, Citation2011) and balance between interests (Hospedales & Jané-Llopis, Citation2011) are important to prevent a single partner, or group of aligned partners, from holding control or negatively interfering. The threat of government regulation and specified timelines can elicit meaningful commitments and help avoid COIs (Moodie et al., Citation2013; WHO GCM/NCD Working Group, Citation2018).
While private sector involvement in research has positive attributes, industry funding has biased studies in favour of the funding industry (Moscetti & Taylor, Citation2015). Furthermore, while research and efforts towards reformulation of unhealthy products benefit HICs where consumption is high, reformulation may encourage consumption in LMICs where consumption is lower (Moodie et al., Citation2013).
There is also a lack of evidence of the efficacy of self-regulation (Moodie et al., Citation2013; Myers et al., Citation2017) leaving doubts that it is an effective form of governance (Myers et al., Citation2017). For self-regulation to be effective, standards such as proportionate power distributions, and external, objective evaluation mechanisms are necessary (Buse et al., Citation2017). Experts believe that public regulation is the only effective and evidence-based approach for achieving positive changes in industry practices (Buse et al., Citation2017; Moodie et al., Citation2013).
Risks associated with private sector involvement are reduced should the private entities be those that are directly or indirectly part of the solution (i.e., sports manufacturers, urban architects, gyms, health insurance, and pharmaceutical companies) (Prescott & Stibbe, Citation2017).
Strengths
This series of systematic reviews had many strengths. They were unique in their goal to investigate the role of the for-profit private sector through these six pillars specifically in NCD prevention and management in LMICs. The results thus fill a gap in the literature which will help better inform the development of health systems in LMICs. The search performed was also comprehensive and included 6 databases and the websites of over 15 different relevant organizations and companies. Furthermore, the databases searched included publications from a variety of disciplines, including biomedical sciences and business, enabling the collection of a diverse range of publications to support a holistic analysis.
Weaknesses
Despite these strengths, this study included limitations. First, the screening, data extraction, and quality assessment for each review were completed by only one reviewer, which could introduce bias. To mitigate this, we ensured that a clear set of inclusion and exclusion criteria were utilized, and explicit instructions for data extraction and quality assessment were provided. Another limitation is that only studies available in English were included, which may have resulted in the automatic exclusion of relevant papers. Lastly, many studies included were determined to be of low quality, suggesting that the data used for the review could be subject to bias. These low ratings, however, could be attributed to the format of included studies and the lack of formal methods sections within them.
Policy perspective
The findings of this review can be used to guide future policy decisions pertaining to the role of the private sector in NCD prevention and management in LMICs. Despite the prevalence and risk of COIs, it is possible to successfully use and work with the private sector to make meaningful changes in NCD burdens. In LMICs where public spending is often limited, the private sector can aid in the mobilization of capital and expertise to compensate. Policies should be considered that involve the private sector in the provision of NCD-related care, services, and resources that provides benefit to public health goals. This must be accompanied by frequent, ongoing evaluations of the value of this contribution and the impact on NCD burdens. These policies may involve incentives to reformulate products to be healthier, improve the distribution and price of health-promoting items (i.e., medication), provide high quality and affordable health services, and fund research that is unbiased and contributes to improved population health outcomes. In addition, there must also be strict, transparent regulatory frameworks that limit the power of the private sector in decision-making or other areas where they may have a negative influence. These frameworks should be under consistent monitoring to assess their effectiveness in mitigating potential negative effects of COIs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this review filled a gap in the literature and provided an overview of the roles that the private sector plays through PPPs, governance and policy, healthcare provision, knowledge educator, innovation, and investment and finance in NCD prevention and management in LMICs. Private sector involvement is prone to COIs, which must be considered throughout the planning and implementation of engagements to ensure optimal action against NCDs. Moving forward, the results of this study can provide guidance to the governments of LMICs regarding private sector involvement in NCD prevention and management.
Contributors
ZAB conceptualized the study. KM, HD, and KT developed methodology. KM, PB, and HD facilitated data collection and organization. KM created all search strategies and conducted screening and analysis for three systematic reviews. PB conducted screening and analysis for the other three systematic reviews. KM drafted the final manuscript, and PB, HD, KT, RM, and ZAB critically revised it. All authors approved the final version.
Ethics approval
Ethics approval was not required for this systematic review of published literature.
Supplemental Material
Download MS Word (170.6 KB)Acknowledgements
We are thankful for the support of the SickKids Centre for Global Child Health and the University of Central Asia throughout this study.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Data availability statement
Data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information in the Appendix. If further information is required, this can be provided by corresponding author on reasonable request.
Supplementary material
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2022.2156099
Additional information
Funding
References
- Abdool-Gaffar, M. S., Ambaram, A., Ainslie, G. M., Bolliger, C. T., Feldman, C., Geffen, L., Irusen, E. M., Joubert, J., Lalloo, U. G., Mabaso, T. T., Nyamande, K. (2011). Guideline for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease–2011 update. South African Medical Journal, 101(1 Pt 2), 63–21.
- AB InBev. (2018). Reducing the harmful use of alcohol and improving road safety: AB InBev’s progress report on its global smart drinking goals and contribution to United Nations sustainable development goals 3 and 17. https://abinbevfoundation.org/advisors-partners
- Abraham, G., Khanna, P., Mathew, M., Pushpkala, P., Mehrotra, A., Sairam, A., & Ali, A. A. (2009). How to make peritoneal dialysis affordable in developing countries. Contributions to Nephrology, 163, 243–249.
- The Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for UHC. (2020). Engaging the private health service delivery sector through governance in mixed health systems :strategyreport of the WHO Advisory Group on the Governance of the Private Sector for Universal Health Coverage. Geneva: World HealthOrganization.
- Agarwal, S. K. (2005). Chronic kidney disease and its prevention in India. Kidney International, 68, S41–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1523-1755.2005.09808.X
- Ahmed, S., Ware, P., Visca, R., Bareil, C., Chouinard, M. C., Desforges, J., Finlayson, R., Fortin, M., Gauthier, J., Grimard, D., & Guay, M. (2015). The prevention and management of chronic disease in primary care: Recommendations from a knowledge translation meeting. BMC Research Notes, 8, 571.
- Alizadeh, G., Gholipour, K., Khosravi, M. F., & Khodayari-Zarnaq, R. (2020). Preventive community-based strategies of cardiovascular diseases in Iran: A multi-method study. Social Work in Public Health, 35(4), 177–186.
- Allen, L. N. (2017). Financing national non-communicable disease responses. Global Health Action, 10(1).
- Allotey, P., Davey, T., & Reidpath, D. D. (2014). NCDs in low and middle-income countries - assessing the capacity of health systems to respond to population needs. BMC Public Health, 14(2), 1–3.
- Angwenyi, V., Aantjes, C., Bunders-Aelen, J., Criel, B., & Lazarus, J. V. (2020). Context matters: A qualitative study of the practicalities and dilemmas of delivering integrated chronic care within primary and secondary care settings in a rural malawian district. BMC Family Practice, 21(1), 1–12.
- Anson, A., Ramay, B., de Esparza, A. R., & Bero, L. (2012). Availability, prices and affordability of the world health organization’s essential medicines for children in guatemala. Globalization and Health, 8, 22.
- Armstrong-Hough, M., Sharma, S., Kishore, S. P., Akiteng, A. R., & Schwartz, J. I. (2020). Variation in the availability and cost of essential medicines for non-communicable diseases in Uganda: A descriptive time series analysis. Plos One, 15, (12), e0241555.
- Ashigbie, P. G., Rockers, P. C., Laing, R. O., Cabral, H. J., Onyango, M. A., Buleti, J. P. L., & Wirtz, V. J. (2020). Availability and prices of medicines for non-communicable diseases at health facilities and retail drug outlets in Kenya: A cross-sectional survey in eight counties. BMJ Open, 10(5), e035132.
- AstraZeneca. (2021). Healthy heart Africa. https://www.astrazeneca.com/sustainability/access-to-healthcare/healthy-heart-africa.html
- Atre, S. (2015). Addressing policy needs for prevention and control of type 2 diabetes in India. Perspectives in Public Health, 135(5), 257–263.
- AVON Global Scholars. (n.d.). Boston University. https://sites.bu.edu/coeinwomenshealth/education/avon-global-scholars/
- Balasubramaniam, R., Benaragama, B. V. S. H., & Sri Ranganathan, S. (2014). A national survey of price and affordability of key essential medicines for children in Sri Lanka. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 81(4), 362–367.
- Ben Romdhane, H., Tlili, F., Skhiri, A., Zaman, S., & Phillimore, P. (2015). Health system challenges of NCDs in Tunisia. International Journal of Public Health, 60(Suppl1), S39–46.
- Beran, D., Mirza, Z., & Dong, J. (2019). Access to insulin: Applying the concept of security of supply to medicines. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 97(5) , 358–364.
- Berendes, S., Heywood, P., Oliver, S., Jenkins, R., & Garner, P. (2011). Quality of private and public ambulatory health care in low and middle income countries: Systematic review of comparative studies. PLoS Medicine, 8(4), e1000433.
- Bergman, M., Buysschaert, M., Schwarz, P. E. H., Albright, A., Narayan, K. M. V., & Yach, D. (2012). Diabetes prevention: Global health policy and perspectives from the ground. Diabetes Manag, 2(4), 309–321.
- Bhattacharyya, O., Khor, S., McGahan, A., Dunne, D., Daar, A. S., & Singer, P. A. (2010). Innovative health service delivery models in low and middle income countries - what can we learn from the private sector? Health policy and systems research, 8, 24.
- Bhojani, U., Devedasan, N., Mishra, A., De Henauw, S., Kolsteren, P., & Criel, B. (2014). Health system challenges in organizing quality diabetes care for urban poor in South India. Plos One, 9(9), e106522.
- Bhojani, U., Thriveni, B. S., Devadasan, R., Munegowda, C. M., Devadasan, N., Criel, B., & Kolsteren, P. (2012). Challenges in organizing quality diabetes care for the urban poor: A local health system perspective. BMC Proceedings, 65(6), 1–3.
- Bhuvan, K. C., Heydon, S., & Norris, P. (2019). Access to and use of medicines in the annapurna region of Western Nepal and possible impacting factors. Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, 12, 11.
- Bigdeli, M., Jacobs, B., Men, C. R., Nilsen, K., Van Damme, W., & Dujardin, B. (2016). Access to treatment for diabetes and hypertension in rural cambodia: Performance of existing social health protection schemes. Plos One, 11(1), e0146147.
- Bintabara, D., Mpondo, B. C. T., & Musinguzi, G. (2018). Preparedness of lower-level health facilities and the associated factors for the outpatient primary care of hypertension: Evidence from tanzanian national survey. Plos One, 13(2), e0192942.
- Bissell, K., Perrin, C., & Beran, D. (2016). Access to essential medicines to treat chronic respiratory disease in low-income countries. The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 20(6), 717–728.
- Bloom, D. E., Cafiero, E., Jané-Llopis, E., Abrahams-Gessel, S., Bloom, L. R., Fathima, S., Feigl, A. B., Gaziano, T., Hamandi, A., Mowafi, M., O’Farrell, D. (2011). The Global Economic Burden of Non-communicable Diseases | World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-economic-burden-non-communicable-diseases
- Bloomfield, G. S., Xavier, D., Belis, D., Alam, D., Davis, P., Prabhakaran, D., Ghannem, H., Gilman, R. H., Kamath, D., Kimaiyo, S., & Levitt, N. (2016). Training and capacity building in LMIC for research in heart and lung diseases: The NHLBI-UnitedHealth global health centers of excellence program. Global Heart, 11(1), 17–25.
- Buse, K., Tanaka, S., & Hawkes, C. (2017). Healthy people and healthy profits? Elaborating a conceptual framework for governing the commercial determinants of non-communicable diseases and identifying options for reducing risk exposure. Globalization and Health, 13, 34.
- Cameron, A., Ewen, M., Ross Degnan, D., Ball, D., & Laing, R. (2009). Medicine prices, availability, and affordability in 36 developing and middle-income countries: A secondary analysis. The Lancet, 373(9659), 240–249.
- Carriedo, A., Koon, A. D., Encarnacion, L. M., Lee, K., Smith, R., & Walls, H. (2021). The political economy of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in Latin America: Lessons from Mexico, Chile and Colombia. Globalization and Health, 17(1), 5.
- Casswell, S. (2013). Vested interests in addiction research and policy why do we not see the corporate interests of the alcohol industry as clearly as we see those of the tobacco industry? Addiction, 108(4), 680–685.
- Casswell, S. (2019). Addressing NCDs: Penetration of the producers of hazardous products into global health environment requires a strong response comment on ‘addressing NCDs: Challenges from industry market promotion and interferences’. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 8(10), 607–609.
- Cataife, G. (2012). Public versus private treatment of chronic diseases in seniors: Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Global Public Health, 7(10), 1157–1169.
- Cattaneo, O., & Piemonte, C. (2021). Transition finance compendium: Challenges and recommendations for the development assistance committee. OECD Development Co-operation Working Papers, https://www.oecd.org/dac/transition-finance-compendium-90f219b1-en.htm
- Cetthakrikul, N., Phulkerd, S., Jaichuen, N., Sacks, G., & Tangcharoensathien, V. (2019). Assessment of the stated policies of prominent food companies related to obesity and non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention in Thailand. Globalization and Health, 15(1), 12.
- Checkley, W., Ghannem, H., Irazola, V., Kimaiyo, S., Levitt, N. S., Miranda, J. J., Niessen, L., Prabhakaran, D., Rabadán-Diehl, C., Ramirez-Zea, M., & Rubinstein, A. (2014). Management of NCD in low- and middle-income countries. Global Heart, 9(4), 431–443.
- Clarke, D., Doerr, S., Hunter, M., Schmets, G., Soucat, A., & Paviza, A. (2019). The private sector and universal health coverage. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 97(6), 434–435.
- Clarke, D., & Paviza, A. (2018). The private sector, universal health coverage and primary health care. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-HIS-SDS-2018.53
- Coriakula, J., Moodie, M., Waqa, G., Latu, C., Snowdon, W., & Bell, C. (2018). The development and implementation of a new import duty on palm oil to reduce non-communicable disease in fiji. Globalization and Health, 14(1), 91.
- Dabare, P. R. L., Wanigatunge, C. A., & Beneragama, B. H. (2014). A national survey on availability, price and affordability of selected essential medicines for non communicable diseases in Sri Lanka. BMC Public Health, 14, 817. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-817
- da Cruz Paula, A., de Varge Maldonado, J. M. S., & Grabois Gadelha, C. A. (2020). Healthcare telemonitoring and business dynamics: Challenges and opportunities for SUS. Revista de Saude Publica, 54, 65.
- Das, M., Choudhury, S., Maity, S., Hazra, A., Pradhan, T., Pal, A., & Roy, R. (2017). Generic versus branded medicines: An observational study among patients with chronic diseases attending a public hospital outpatient department. Journal of Natural Science, Biology, and Medicine, 8(1), 26–31.
- Dearing, J. W., & Cox, J. G. (2018). Diffusion of innovations theory, principles, and practice. Health Affairs, 37(2), 183–190.
- Dobe, M. (2012). Health promotion for prevention and control of non-communicable diseases: Unfinished agenda. Indian Journal of Public Health, 56(3), 180–186. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-557X.104199
- Doshi, P. P., Bhosai, S. J., Goldmann, D., & Udayakumar, K. (2021). Imagining the future of primary care: A global look at innovative health care delivery. NEJM Catal. https://doi.org/10.1056/CAT.20.0481
- Dugee, O., Palam, E., Dorjsuren, B., & Mahal, A. (2018). Who is bearing the financial burden of non-communicable diseases in Mongolia? Journal of Global Health, 8(1), 010415.
- Dutta, A., & Ly, C. (2018). Financing the health systems of the future: A proposed framework for including non-communicable diseases. World Bank. https://blogs.worldbank.org/health/financing-health-systems-future-proposed-framework-including-non-communicable-diseases
- Ebrahim, S., Pearce, N., Smeeth, L., JP, C., Jaffar, S., & Piot, P. (2013). Tackling non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: Is the evidence from high-income countries all we need? PLoS Medicine, 10(1), e1001377.
- Elias, M. A., Pati, M. K., Aivalli, P., Srinath, B., Munegowda, C., Shroff, Z. C., Bigdeli, M., & Srinivas, P. N. (2018). Preparedness for delivering non-communicable disease services in primary care: Access to medicines for diabetes and hypertension in a district in south India. BMJ Global Health, 2(Suppl 3), e000519.
- El-Saharty, S., Ahsan, K. Z., Koehlmoos, T. L. P., & Engelgau, M. M. (2013). Tackling noncommunicable diseases in Bangladesh: Now is the time. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9920-0
- El-Sayed, A. M., Palma, A., Freedman, L. P., & Kruk, M. E. (2015). Does health insurance mitigate inequities in non-communicable disease treatment? Evidence from 48 low- and middle-income countries. Health Policy, 119(9), 1164–1175.
- Engelgau, M. M., Sampson, U. K., Rabadan Diehl, C., Smith, R., Miranda, J., Bloomfield, G. S., Belis, D., Narayan, K. M. V., Rubinstein, A., He, J., Alam, D. S., Peters, D. H., Wu, Y., Yan, L. L., Merson, M., Ramirez, M., Caballero, B., Xavier, D., Yusuf, S. … Aluko, E. (2016). Tackling NCD in LMIC: Achievements and lessons learned from the NHLBI-UnitedHealth global health centers of excellence program. Global Heart, 11(1), 5–15.
- Evert, A., Fleming, A., Gaudiani, L. M., Guggenmos, K. J., Kaufer, D. I., McGill, J. B., Verderese, C. A., & Martinez, J. (2019). Culinary medicine: Advancing a framework for healthier eating to improve chronic disease management and prevention. Clinical Therapeutics, 41(10), 2184–2198.
- FAO, I. F. A. D., UNICEF, W. F. P., & WHO. (2020). The state of food security and nutrition in the World 2020. Transforming food systems for affordable healthy diets. https://www.unicef.org/reports/state-of-food-security-and-nutrition-2020
- Ganju, A., Goulart, A. C., Ray, A., Majumdar, A., Jeffers, B. W., Llamosa, G., Cañizares, H., Ramos-Cañizares, I. J., Fadhil, I., Subramaniam, K., Lim, L. L., El Bizri, L., Ramesh, M., Guilford, M., Ali, R., Devi, R. D., Malik, R. A., Potkar, S., & Wang, Y. P. (2020). Systemic solutions for addressing non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 13, 693–707.
- George, A. A. (2018). An unwelcome seat at the table: The role of big food in public and private standard-setting and its implications for NCD regulation. QUT Law Review, 18(1), 156–168.
- Global Systems for Mobile Communications. (2019). CASALUD: A suite of digital health services for the prevention and management of NCDs. https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/resources/carlos-slim-foundation-case-study/
- Gómez, E. J. (2019). Coca-cola’s political and policy influence in Mexico: Understanding the role of institutions, interests and divided society. Health Policy and Planning, 34(7), 520–528.
- Goroff, M., & Reich, M. R. (2010). Partnerships to provide care and medicine for chronic diseases: A model for emerging markets. Health Affairs, 29(12), 2206–2213.
- Gortmaker, S. L., Swinburn, B. A., Levy, D., Carter, R., Mabry, P. L., Finegood, D. T., Huang, T., Marsh, T., & Moodie, M. L. (2012). Changing the future of obesity: Science, policy, and action. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, 67(1), 6–8.
- Grancelli, H. (2005). Randomised trial of telephone intervention in chronic heart failure: DIAL trial. BMJ British Medical Journal, 331(7514), 425.
- Hancock, C., Kingo, L., & Raynaud, O. (2011). The private sector, international development and NCDs. Globalization and Health, 7(1), 23.
- Hawker, S., Payne, S., Kerr, C., Hardey, M., & Powell, J. (2002). Appraising the evidence: Reviewing disparate data systematically. Qualitative Health Research, 12(9), 1284–1299.
- Hawkes, C., & Buse, K. (2011). Public health sector and food industry interaction: It’s time to clarify the term ‘partnership’ and be honest about underlying interests. European Journal of Public Health, 21(4), 400–401.
- Healthy Caribbean Coalition & NCD Alliance. (2017). Preventing Childhood Obesity in the Caribbean. https://ncdalliance.org/resources/preventing-childhood-obesity-in-the-caribbean
- Heidari, E., Varmaghani, M., & Abdollahiasl, A. (2019). Availability, pricing and affordability of selected medicines for noncommunicable diseases. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 25(7), 473–480.
- Herzlinger, R. E. (2006, May). Why innovation in health care is so hard. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2006/05/why-innovation-in-health-care-is-so-hard
- Holt, T., Millroy, L., & Mmopi, M. (2017). Winning in Nigeria: Pharma’s next frontier. Pharmaceuticals & Medical Products. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/pharmaceuticals-and-medical-products/our-insights/winning-in-nigeria-pharmas-next-frontier
- Hospedales, C. J., & Jané-Llopis, E. (2011). A multistakeholder platform to promote health and prevent noncommunicable diseases in the region of the americas: The pan american health organization partners forum for action. Journal of Health Communication, 16(Sup 2), 191–200.
- IFC. (2011). Public-private partnership stories. India: Andhra Pradesh radiology. World Bank Group. https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1516322/india-andhra-pradesh-radiology/2192732/
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). (2020). Non-communicable diseases — level 1 cause. University of Washington. http://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/non-communicable-diseases-level-1-cause
- Jaichuen, N., Phulkerd, S., Certthkrikul, N., Sacks, G., & Tangcharoensathien, V. (2018). Corporate political activity of major food companies in Thailand: An assessment and policy recommendations. Globalization and Health, 14(1), 1–11.
- Johnson, M., Wilkinson, J., Gardner, A., Kupfer, L. E., Kimaiyo, S., & Von Zinkernagel, D. (2018). Global partnerships to support noncommunicable disease care in low and middle-income countries: Lessons from HIV/AIDS. AIDS, 32(Suppl 1), S75–82.
- Jones, J. Q. (2021). Global action on financing cervical cancer elimination: Funding secondary prevention services in low resource settings. https://eiuperspectives.economist.com/healthcare/global-action-financing-cervical-cancer-elimination-funding-secondary-prevention-services-low
- Joshi, R., Alim, M., Kengne, A. P., Jan, S., Maulik, P. K., Peiris, D., & Patel, A. A. (2014). Task shifting for non-communicable disease management in low and middle income countries – a systematic review. Plos One, 9(8), e103754.
- Kanzler, L., & Ng, A. (2012). The future of public and private health care insurance in Asia. In D. Coady, B. J. Clements, & S. Gupta (Eds.), The economics of public health care reform in advanced and emerging economies (pp. 55–68). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781616352448.071
- Kasonde, L., Tordrup, D., Naheed, A., Zeng, W., Ahmed, S., & Babar, Z. U. (2019). Evaluating medicine prices, availability and affordability in Bangladesh using world health organisation and health action international methodology. BMC Health Services Research, 19, 383.
- Khayatzadeh-Mahani, A., Ruckert, A., & Labonté, R. (2018). Could the WHO’s framework on engagement with non-state actors (FENSA) be a threat to tackling childhood obesity? Global Public Health, 13(9), 1337–1340.
- Khuluza, F., & Haefele-Abah, C. (2019). The availability, prices and affordability of essential medicines in Malawi: A cross-sectional study. Plos One, 14(2), e0212125.
- Kickbusch, I., Allen, L., & Franz, C. (2016). The commercial determinants of health. Lancet Glob Heal, 4(12), e895–896.
- Kishore, S. P., Kolappa, K., Jarvis, J. D., Park, P. H., Belt, R., Balasubramaniam, T., & Kiddell-Monroe, R. (2015). Overcoming obstacles to enable access to medicines for noncommunicable diseases in poor countries. Health Affairs, 34(9), 1569–1577.
- Kraak, V. I., Harrigan, P. B., Lawrence, M., Harrison, P. J., Jackson, M. A., & Swinburn, B. (2012). Balancing the benefits and risks of public-private partnerships to address the global double burden of malnutrition. Public Health Nutrition, 15(3), 503–517.
- Laar, A. K., Adler, A. J., Kotoh, A. M., Legido-Quigley, H., Lange, I. L., Perel, P., & Lamptey, P. (2019). Health system challenges to hypertension and related non-communicable diseases prevention and treatment: Perspectives from Ghanaian stakeholders. BMC Health Services Research, 19, 693.
- Ladusingh, L., Mohanty, S. K., & Thangjam, M. (2018). Triple burden of disease and out of pocket healthcare expenditure of women in India. Plos One, 13(5), e0196835.
- Lambert, E. V., & Kolbe-Alexander, T. L. (2013). Innovative strategies targeting obesity and non-communicable diseases in South Africa: What can we learn from the private healthcare sector? Obesity Reviews : An Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 14(2), 141–149.
- Lauber, K., Ralston, R., Mialon, M., Carriedo, A., & Gilmore, A. B. (2020). Non-communicable disease governance in the era of the sustainable development goals: A qualitative analysis of food industry framing in WHO consultations. Globalization and Health, 16(1), 76.
- Lekshmi, S., Mohanta, G. P., Revikumar, K. G., & Manna, P. K. (2014). Study on availability and affordability of anti hypertensive medicines in the State of Kerala. International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 6(10), 364–369.
- Lewis, M., Penteado, E., & Malik, A. M. (2015). Brazil’s mixed public and private hospital system. World Hospitals and Health Services Journal, 22–26. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26521382/
- Malekzadeh, A., Michels, K., Wolfman, C., Anand, N., & Sturke, R. (2020). Strengthening research capacity in LMICs to address the global NCD burden. Global Health Action, 13(1), 1846904.
- Mariath, A. B., & Martins, A. P. B. (2020). Ultra-processed products industry operating as an interest group. Revista de Saude Publica, 54, 107.
- Medtronic Foundation. (n.d.). Addressing noncommunicable diseases by building capacity, community, and commitment.
- Mendis, S., & Chestnov, O. (2013). Policy reform to realize the commitments of the political declaration on noncommunicable diseases. British Medical Bulletin, 105, 7–27.
- Mendis, S., Fukino, K., Cameron, A., Laing, R., Filipe, J. A., Khatib, O., Leowski, J., & Ewen, M. (2007). The availability and affordability of selected essential medicines for chronic diseases in six low- and middle-income countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 85(4), 279–288.
- Merck, K. (2021). Merck foundation capacity advancement & nationwide diabetes blue point program. Merck Foundation. https://merck-foundation.com/our-programs/Merck-Foundation-Capacity-Advancement-and-Nationwide-Diabetes-Blue-Point-Program
- Mhlanga, B. S., & Suleman, F. (2014). Price, availability and affordability of medicines. African Journal of Primary Health Care and Family Medicine, 6(1), 604.
- Mialon, M., Charry, D. A. G., Cediel, G., Crosbie, E., Scagliusi, F. B., & Pérez Tamayo, E. M. (2020). ‘The architecture of the state was transformed in favour of the interests of companies’: Corporate political activity of the food industry in Colombia. Globalization and Health, 16(1), 97.
- Mialon, M., & Da Silva Gomes, F. (2019). Public health and the ultra-processed food and drink products industry: Corporate political activity of major transnationals in Latin America and the Caribbean. Public Health Nutrition, 22(10), 1898–1908.
- Mialon, M., Gaitan Charry, D. A., Cediel, G., Crosbie, E., Scagliusi, F. B., & Perez Tamayo, E. M. (2021). ‘I had never seen so many lobbyists’: Food industry political practices during the development of a new nutrition front-of-pack labelling system in Colombia. Public Health Nutrition, 24(9), 2737–2745.
- Mialon, M., Swinburn, B., Wate, J., Tukana, I., & Sacks, G. (2016). Analysis of the corporate political activity of major food industry actors in Fiji. Globalization and Health, 12(1), 1–14.
- Moodie, R., Stuckler, D., Monteiro, C., Sheron, N., Neal, B., Thamarangsi, T., Lincoln, P., & Casswell, S. (2013). Profits and pandemics: Prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food and drink industries. The Lancet, 381(9867), 670–679.
- Moscetti, C. W., & Taylor, A. L. (2015). Take me to your liter: Politics, power, and public-private partnerships with the sugar-sweetened beverage industry in the post-2015 development agenda. Washington International Law Journal, 24(3), 635–671.
- Mukherjee, S., Haddad, S., & Narayana, D. (2011). Social class related inequalities in household health expenditure and economic burden: Evidence from Kerala, south India. International Journal for Equity in Health, 10(1), 1.
- Musinguzi, G., Bastiaens, H., Wanyenze, R. K., Mukose, A., Van Geertruyden, J. P., & Nuwaha, F. (2015). Capacity of health facilities to manage hypertension in Mukono and Buikwe Districts in Uganda: Challenges and recommendations. Plos One, 10(11), e0142312.
- Myers, A., Fig, D., Tugendhaft, A., Mandle, J., Myers, J., & Hofman, K. (2017). Sugar and health in South Africa: Potential challenges to leveraging policy change. Global Public Health, 12(1), 98–115.
- Nari Kahle, H., Dubiel, A., Ernst, H., & Prabhu, J. (2013). The democratizing effect of frugal innovation: Implications for inclusive growth and state-building. Journal of Indian Business Research, 5(4), 220–234.
- Novo Nordisk. (2017). Base of the pyramid programme. Novo Nordisk.
- Oladepo, O., Oluwasanu, M., & Abiona, O. (2018). Analysis of tobacco control policies in Nigeria: Historical development and application of multi-sectoral action. BMC Public Health, 18(S1), 959.
- Oluwole, D., & Kraemer, J. (2013). Innovative public–private partnership: A diagonal approach to combating women’s cancers in Africa. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 91(9), 691–696.
- Omachonu, V. K., & Einspruch, N. G. (2010). Innovation in healthcare delivery systems: A conceptual framework. Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 15(1), 2.
- Ota, M. O. C., Kirigia, D. G., Asamoah-Odei, E., Drameh-Avognon, P. S., Olu, O., Malecela, M. N., Cabore, J. W., & Moeti, M. R. (2018). Proceedings of the first African health forum: Effective partnerships and intersectoral collaborations are critical for attainment of universal health coverage in Africa. BMC Proceedings, 12(S7), 8.
- Pandian, J. D., Srikanth, V., Read, S. J., & Thrift, A. G. (2007). Poverty and stroke in India: A time to act. Stroke, 38(11), 3063–3069.
- Parikh, H. S. (2013). Innovations in Chronic Disease Management (CDM) from Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs). ProQuest.
- Pastakia, S. D., Tran, D. N., Manji, I., Schellhase, E., Karwa, R., Miller, M. L., Aruasa, W., & Khan, Z. M. (2020). Framework and case study for establishing impactful global health programs through academia - biopharmaceutical industry partnerships. Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy : RSAP, 16(11), 1519–1525.
- Patel, D. N., Lambert, E. V., da Silva, R., Greyling, M., Nossel, C., Noach, A., Derman, W., & Gaziano, T. (2010). The association between medical costs and participation in the vitality health promotion program among 948,974 members of a South African health insurance company. American journal of health promotion, 24(3), 199–204.
- Pati, M. K., Swaroop, N., Kar, A., Aggarwal, P., Jayanna, K., & Van Damme, W. (2020). A narrative review of gaps in the provision of integrated care for noncommunicable diseases in India. Public Health Reviews, 41, 8.
- Pfizer, U. (2020). Leading the conversation on noncommunicable diseases worldwide: An evidence-based review of key research and strategies to develop sustainable solutions. Pfizer Upjohn. https://www.pfizer.com/upjohn_ncd_white_paper
- Plum, A., Tanniru, M., & Khuntia, J. (2020). An innovation platform for diffusing public health practices across a global network. Health Policy and Technology, 9(2), 225–234.
- Polanczyk, C. A., & Ribeiro, J. P. (2009). Coronary artery disease in Brazil: Contemporary management and future perspectives. Heart, 95(11), 870–876.
- Prescott, D., & Stibbe, D. (2017). Better together: Unleashing the Power of the Private Sector to Tackle Non-Communicable Diseases. The Partnering Initiative (Oxford), UICC (Geneva) and Bupa (London).
- Rahman, M. M., Gilmour, S., Saito, E., Sultana, P., & Shibuya, K. (2013). Health-related financial catastrophe, inequality and chronic illness in Bangladesh. Plos One, 8(2), e56873.
- Ratzan, S. C., Weinberger, M. B., Apfel, F., & Kocharian, G. (2013). The digital health scorecard: A new health literacy metric for NCD prevention and care. Global Heart, 8(2), 171–179.
- Rawal, L. B., Kharel, C., Yadav, U. N., Kanda, K., Biswas, T., Vandelanotte, C., Baral, S., & Abdullah, A. S. (2020). Community health workers for non-communicable disease prevention and control in Nepal: A qualitative study. BMJ Open, 10(12), e040350.
- Reeves, M. (2011). The private sector’s role in combating NCDs. CSIS. https://www.csis.org/blogs/smart-global-health/private-sectors-role-combating-ncds
- Rockers, P. C., Laing, R. O., Ashigbie, P. G., Onyango, M. A., Mukiira, C. K., & Wirtz, V. J. (2019). Effect of novartis access on availability and price of non-communicable disease medicines in Kenya: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet Glob Heal, 7(4), e492–502.
- Rouleau, G., Gagnon, M. P., Côté, J., Payne-Gagnon, J., Hudson, E., & Dubois, C. A. (2017). Impact of information and communication technologies on nursing care: Results of an overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(4), e122.
- Sacks, G., Mialon, M., Vandevijvere, S., Trevena, H., Snowdon, W., Crino, M., & Swinburn, B. (2015). Comparison of food industry policies and commitments on marketing to children and product (re)formulation in Australia, New Zealand and Fiji. Critical Public Health, 25(3), 299–319.
- Sado, E., & Sufa, A. (2016). Availability and affordability of essential medicines for children in the Western part of Ethiopia: Implication for access. BMC Pediatrics, 16, 40.
- Saldarriaga, E. M., Vodicka, E., La Rosa, S., Valderrama, M., & Garcia, P. J. (2017). Point-of-care testing for anemia, diabetes, and hypertension: A pharmacy-based model in Lima, Peru. Annals of global health, 83(2), 394–404.
- Sanni, S., Hongoro, C., Ndinda, C., & Wisdom, J. P. (2018). Assessment of the multi-sectoral approach to tobacco control policies in South Africa and Togo. BMC Public Health, 18(S1), 962.
- Schmutz, A., Salignat, C., Plotkina, D., Devouassoux, A., Lee, T., Arnold, M., Ervik, M., & Kelm, O. (2019). Mapping the global cancer research funding landscape. JNCI Cancer Spectrum, 3(4), pkz069.
- Shannon, G. D., Haghparast-Bidgoli, H., Chelagat, W., Kibachio, J., & Skordis-Worrall, J. (2019). Innovating to increase access to diabetes care in Kenya: An evaluation of novo nordisk’s base of the pyramid project. Global Health Action, 12(1), 105704.
- Shellaby, L. S. & Henshall, S. (2018). Confronting the Investment Gap in Non-Communicable Disease Treatment and Care. https://www.uicc.org/resources/confronting-investment-gap-non-communicable-disease-treatment-and-care
- Shuvo, T. A., Islam, R., Hossain, S., Evans, J., Khatun, F., Ahmed, T., Gazi, R., & Adams, A. M. (2015). eHealth innovations in LMICs of Africa and Asia: A literature review exploring factors affecting implementation, scale-up, and sustainability. Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Health, 2, 95–106.
- Silva, V. L. C. E., Turci, S. R. B., de Oliveira, A. P. N., & Richter, A. P. (2017). Can the risk in public-private partnerships be classified? Cadernos de Saude Publica, 33(3), e00086316.
- Singh, T., Roy, P., Jamir, L., Gupta, S., Kaur, N., Jain, D. K., & Kumar, R. (2016). Assessment of universal healthcare coverage in a district of North India: A rapid cross-sectional survey using tablet computers. Plos One, 11(6), e0157831.
- Smith, R., & Rabadan Diehl, C. (2016). Public-private partnership in countering NCD. Global Heart, 11(1), 143–144.
- Subramanian, S., Gakunga, R., Kibachio, J., Gathecha, G., Edwards, P., Ogola, E., Yonga, G., Busakhala, N., Munyoro, E., Chakaya, J., Ngugi, N., Mwangi, N., Von Rege, D., Wangari, L. M., Wata, D., Makori, R., Mwangi, J., & Mwanda, W. (2018). Cost and affordability of non-communicable disease screening, diagnosis and treatment in Kenya: Patient payments in the private and public sectors. Plos One, 13(1), e0190113.
- Suzuki, M., Webb, D., & Small, R. (2021). Competing frames in global health governance: An analysis of stakeholder influence on the political declaration on non-communicable diseases. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2020.257
- Syed, N., Rockers, P. C., Vian, T., Onyango, M., Laing, R. O., & Wirtz, V. J. (2018). Access to antihypertensive medicines at the household level: A study from 8 counties of Kenya. Global Heart, 13(4), 247–253.e5.
- Tangcharoensathien, V., Chandrasiri, O., Kunpeuk, W., Markchang, K., & Pangkariya, N. (2019). Addressing NCDs: Challenges from industry market promotion and interferences. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 8(5), 256–260.
- Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 1–10.
- Thow, A. M., Greenberg, S., Hara, M., Friel, S., duToit, A., & Sanders, D. (2018). Improving policy coherence for food security and nutrition in South Africa: A qualitative policy analysis. Food Security, 10(4), 1105–1130.
- Thow, A. M., Verma, G., Soni, D., Soni, D., Beri, D. K., Kumar, P., Siegel, K. R., Shaikh, N., & Khandelwal, S. (2018). How can health, agriculture and economic policy actors work together to enhance the external food environment for fruit and vegetables? A qualitative policy analysis in India. Food Policy, 77, 143–151.
- Trager, A. M. (2020). A better approach to fighting chronic diseases. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/09/a-better-approach-to-fighting-chronic-diseases
- Tripathy, J. P., & Prasad, B. M. (2018). Cost of diabetic care in India: An inequitable picture. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, 12(3), 251–255.
- Tusubira, A. K., Akiteng, A. R., Nakirya, B. D., Nalwoga, R., Ssinabulya, I., Nalwadda, C. K., & Schwartz, J. I. (2020). Accessing medicines for non-communicable diseases: Patients and health care workers’ experiences at public and private health facilities in Uganda. Plos One, 15(7), e0235696.
- Tzeel, A. L. (2011). Diabetes benefit management: Evolving strategies for payers. The American Journal of Managed Care, 17(14), S384–S390.
- U.N. General Assembly. (2012). Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases. https://www.who.int/nmh/events/un_ncd_summit2011/political_declaration_en.pdf
- UNICEF. (2019). Programme guidance for early life prevention of non-communicable diseases. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).
- UNICEF. (2020). Nutrition, for every child: UNICEF Nutrition Strategy 2020-2030. https://www.unicef.org/reports/nutrition-strategy-2020-2030
- U.S. Department of State. (2011). Pink ribbon red ribbon overview. US Department of State. https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/09/172244.htm
- van de Vijver, S., Oti, S., Cohen Tervaert, T., Hankins, C., Kyobutungi, C., Gomez, G. B., Brewster, L., Agyemang, C., & Lange, J. (2013). Introducing a model of cardiovascular prevention in nairobi’s slums by integrating a public health and private-sector approach: The SCALE-UP study. Global Health Action, 6, 22510.
- van Mourik, M. S. M., Cameron, A., Ewen, M., & Laing, R. O. (2010). Availability, price and affordability of cardiovascular medicines: A comparison across 36 countries using WHO/HAI data. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 10, 25.
- Wearne, N., Okpechi, I. G., & Swanepoel, C. R. (2019). Nephrology in South Africa: Not yet ubuntu. Kidney Disease, 5(3), 189–196.
- WHO. (2008). Health information systems. World Health Organization (WHO).
- WHO. (2013). Global action plan for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020. World Health Organization. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/94384/1/9789241506236_eng.pdf
- WHO. (2016). SHAKE the salt habit: The SHAKE technical package for salt reduction. WHO. http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/publications/shake-salt-habit/en/
- WHO. (2019). It’s time to walk the talk: WHO independent high-level commission on noncommunicable diseases final report.
- WHO. (2020). Countdown to 2023: WHO report on global trans-fat elimination 2020. World Health Organization (WHO).
- WHO. (2021, July 4-15). Strengthening NCD service delivery through UHC benefit package: Technical meeting report. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/strengthening-ncd-service-delivery-through-uhc-benefit-package-technical-meeting-report-geneva-switzerland-14-15-july-2020
- WHO. (2021). WHO technical manual on tobacco tax policy and administration. World Health Organization (WHO).
- WHO. (2021). Noncommunicable diseases. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases
- WHO GCM/NCD Working Group. (2018). Engaging with the private sector for the prevention and control of NCDs. World Health Organization (WHO).
- Williams, S. N. (2015). The incursion of ‘big food’ in middle-income countries: A qualitative documentary case study analysis of the soft drinks industry in China and India. Critical Public Health, 25(4), 455–473.
- Wirtz, V. J., Turpin, K., Laing, R. O., Mukiira, C. K., & Rockers, P. C. (2018). Access to medicines for asthma, diabetes and hypertension in eight counties of Kenya. Tropical Medicine & International Health : TM & IH, 23(8), 879–885.
- World Bank. (2013). The growing burden of non-communicable diseases in the Eastern Caribbean. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/954761468224410323/the-growing-burden-of-non-communicable-diseases-in-the-eastern-caribbean
- World Economic Forum & PAHO. (2013). Multistakeholder collaboration for healthy - living toolkit for joint action. https://www.weforum.org/reports/multistakeholder-collaboration-healthy-living-toolkit-joint-action
- World Health Organization. (2021). Commercial determinants of health. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/commercial-determinants-of-health
- You, H. W., Tajuddin, N. S. A., & Anwar, Y. A. M. S. (2019). Measuring availability, prices and affordability of ischaemic heart disease medicines in Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Medical Science, 26(5), 113–121.