Background: It is imperative that researchers studying medical tourism connect their work with policy, so that its real-world challenges can be better understood, and more effectively addressed. This article gauges the scope and evolution of policy thinking in medical tourism research through a bibliometric review of published academic literature, to establish the extent to which researchers apply public policy theories and frameworks in their investigation of medical tourism, or consider the policy imperatives of their work. Methods: A Boolean search of the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection was performed to identify policy-related publications on medical tourism. We analyzed the results using bibliometrics and a data visualization software called VOSviewer to identify patterns in knowledge production and underlying network linkages in policy research on the subject. Results: Our findings suggest that only a small proportion of medical tourism research explicitly addresses policy issues or applies policy paradigms in their study approach. Field-specialized journals serving practitioners publish less research as compared to interdisciplinary social and health policy journals. Moreover, there are significant geographical and disciplinary disparities in the policy-orientation of research, and a predilection towards select policy areas such as reproductive and transplant tourism to the neglect of more holistic governance and health system considerations. Conclusion: This article is a call to action for greater engagement by policy scholars on medical tourism, and for health researchers to more explicitly consider how their research might contribute to the understanding and resolution of contemporary policy challenges of medical tourism. Failure to clearly and consistently make the policy connection is a lost opportunity for researchers to frame the public debate, and influence policy thinking on medical tourism.

Medical tourism occupies different spaces within national policy frameworks depending on which side of the transnational paradigm countries belong to, and how they seek to leverage it towards their developmental goals. This article draws attention to this policy divide in transnational healthcare through a comparative bibliometric review of policy research on medical tourism in select source (Canada, United States and United Kingdom) and destination countries (Mexico, India, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore), using a systematic search of the Web of Science (WoS) database and review of grey literature. We assess cross-national differences in policy and policy research on medical tourism against contextual policy landscapes and challenges, and examine the convergence between research and policy. Our findings indicate major disparities in development agendas and national policy concerns, both between and among source and destination countries. Further, we find that research on medical tourism does not always address prevailing policy challenges, just as the policy discourse oftentimes neglects relevant policy research on the subject. Based on our review, we highlight the limited application of theoretical policy paradigms in current medical tourism research and make the case for a comparative policy research agenda for the field.

The objective of policy design is to devise policies for the achievement of predetermined policy goals. Their effectiveness hinges on a determination of what constitutes policy success, and assessments of the suitability of different design configurations in attaining the intended outcomes. Failure to clearly specify policy goals and ascertain policy success (or failure) can thus render them ineffective. Goal ambiguities are particularly problematic in the context of collaborative policy instruments like Public-Private Partnerships (P3s) due to the multiplicity of stakeholder interests. Using the example of P3s in India's healthcare sector, this paper points to inherent contradictions in the policy expectations of different actors, and how policies which neglect an appreciation of the agendas of diverse constituencies are inherently unworkable and produce outcomes which are inequitable and inconsistent with their underlying motivations. By situating these cases against the academic discussion on frame-multiplicity and policy success, the paper highlights why policymakers must consider these different, sometimes conflicting ideas of effectiveness, and how they can be reconciled through proactive design efforts, so that policies are sustainable and effective in meeting their overarching goals.

The debate on how India's health system should move towards universal health coverage was (meant to be) put to rest by the recent National Health Policy 2017. However, the new policy is silent about tackling bottlenecks mentioned in the said policy proposal. It aims to provide universal access to free primary care by strengthening the public system, and to secondary and tertiary care through strategic purchasing from the private sector, to overcome deficiencies in public provisioning in the short run. Yet, in doing so, it ignores critical factors needed to replicate successful models of public healthcare delivery from certain states that it hopes to emulate. The policy also overestimates the capacity of the public sector and downplays the challenges observed in purchasing secondary care. Drawing from literature in policy design, we emphasize that primary, secondary and tertiary care have distinct characteristics, and their provision requires separate approaches or policy tools depending on the context. Public provisioning, contract purchasing and insurance mechanisms are different policy tools that have to be matched with the context and characteristics of the policy arena. Given the current challenges of India's health system, we argue that tertiary care services are most suitable for insurance-based purchasing, while the public sector should concentrate on building the required capacities to dominate the provisioning of secondary care and fill gaps in primary care delivery, for India to achieve its universal coverage ambitions.

No abstract