Measurement of health system performance increasingly includes the views of healthcare users, yet little research has focussed on general population satisfaction with health systems. This study is the first to examine public satisfaction with health systems in the former Soviet Union (fSU). Data were derived from two related studies conducted in 2001 and 2010 in nine fSU countries, using nationally representative cross-sectional surveys. The prevalence of health system satisfaction in each country was compared for 2001 and 2010. Patterns of satisfaction were further examined by comparing satisfaction with the health system and other parts of the public sector, and the views of health care users and non-users. Potential determinants of population satisfaction were explored using logistic regression. For all countries combined, the level of satisfaction with health systems increased from 19.4% in 2001 to 40.6% in 2010, but varied considerably by country. Changes in satisfaction with the health system were similar to changes with the public sector, and non-users of healthcare were slightly more likely to report satisfaction than users. Characteristics associated with higher satisfaction include younger age, lower education, higher economic status, rural residency, better health status, and higher levels of political trust. Our results suggest that satisfaction can provide useful insight into public opinion on health system performance, particularly when used in conjunction with other subjective measures of satisfaction with government performance.

We undertook a systematic review to assess 1) the level and quality of pharmacy and drug shop provision of medical abortion (MA) in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) and 2) interventions to improve quality of provision. We used standardized terms to search six databases for peer‐reviewed and grey literature. We double‐extracted data using a standardized template, and double‐graded studies for methodological quality. We identified 22 studies from 16 countries reporting on level and quality of MA provision through pharmacies and drug sellers, and three intervention studies. Despite widespread awareness and provision of MA drugs, even in legally restricted contexts, most studies found that pharmacy workers and drug sellers had poor knowledge of effective regimens. Evidence on interventions to improve pharmacy and drug shop provision of MA was limited and generally low quality, but indicated that training could be effective in improving knowledge. Programmatic attention should focus on the development and rigorous evaluation of innovative interventions to improve women's access to information about MA self‐management in low‐and middle‐income countries.

Abstractobjective Family planning service delivery has been neglected; rigorous analyses of the patterns of contraceptive provision are needed to inform strategies to address this neglect.methods We used 57 nationally representative Demographic and Health Surveys in low-and middle-income countries (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013) in four geographic regions to estimate need for contraceptive services, and examined the sector of provision, by women's socio-economic position. We also assessed method mix and whether women were informed of side effects.results Modern contraceptive use among women in need was lowest in sub-Saharan Africa (39%), with other regions ranging from 64% to 72%. The private sector share of the family planning market was 37-39% of users across the regions and 37% overall (median across countries: 41%). Private sector users accessed medical providers (range across regions: 30-60%, overall mean: 54% and median across countries 23%), specialised drug sellers (range across regions: 31-52%, overall mean: 36% and median across countries: 43%) and retailers (range across regions: 3-14%, overall mean: 6% and median across countries: 6%). Private retailers played a more important role in sub-Saharan Africa (14%) than in other regions (3-5%). NGOs and FBOs served a small percentage. Privileged women (richest wealth quintile, urban residents or secondary-/tertiary-level education) used private sector services more than the less privileged. Contraceptive method types with higher requirements (medical skills) for provision were less likely to be acquired from the private sector, while shortacting methods/injectables were more likely. The percentages of women informed of side effects varied by method and provider subtype, but within subtypes were higher among public than private medical providers for four of five methods assessed.conclusion Given the importance of private sector providers, we need to understand why women choose their services, what quality services the private sector provides, and how it can be improved. However, when prioritising one of the two sectors (public vs. private), it is critical to consider the potential impact on contraceptive prevalence and equity of met need.keywords family planning, method mix, quality of care, public providers, private providers, lowand middle-income countries

Abstractobjective The objective of this study was to assess the role of the private sector in low-and middleincome countries (LMICs). We used Demographic and Health Surveys for 57 countries (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013) to evaluate the private sector's share in providing three reproductive and maternal/newborn health services (family planning, antenatal and delivery care), in total and by socio-economic position.methods We used data from 865 547 women aged 15-49, representing a total of 3 billion people. We defined 'met and unmet need for services' and 'use of appropriate service types' clearly and developed explicit classifications of source and sector of provision.results Across the four regions (sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East/Europe, Asia and Latin America), unmet need ranged from 28% to 61% for family planning, 8% to 22% for ANC and 21% to 51% for delivery care. The private-sector share among users of family planning services was 37-39% across regions (overall mean: 37%; median across countries: 41%). The private-sector market share among users of ANC was 13-61% across regions (overall mean: 44%; median across countries: 15%). The private-sector share among appropriate deliveries was 9-56% across regions (overall mean: 40%; median across countries: 14%). For all three healthcare services, women in the richest wealth quintile used private services more than the poorest. Wealth gaps in met need for services were smallest for family planning and largest for delivery care.conclusions The private sector serves substantial numbers of women in LMICs, particularly the richest. To achieve universal health coverage, including adequate quality care, it is imperative to understand this sector, starting with improved data collection on healthcare provision.keywords maternal heath, family planning, antenatal care, delivery care, Demographic and Health Surveys, private sector

BackgroundResearchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are under-represented in scientific literature. Mapping of authorship of articles can provide an assessment of data ownership and research capacity in LMICs over time and identify variations between different settings.MethodsSystematic mapping of maternal health interventional research in LMICs from 2000 to 2012, comparing country of study and of affiliation of first authors. Studies on health systems or promotion; community-based activities; and haemorrhage, hypertension, HIV/STIs and malaria were included. Following review of 35,078 titles and abstracts, 2292 full-text publications were included. Data ownership was measured by the proportion of articles with an LMIC lead author (author affiliated with an LMIC institution).ResultsThe total number of papers led by an LMIC author rose from 45.0/year in 2000–2003 to 98.0/year in 2004–2007, but increased only slightly thereafter to 113.1/year in 2008–2012. In the same periods, the proportion of papers led by a local author was 58.4 %, 60.8 % and 60.1 %, respectively. Data ownership varies markedly between countries. A quarter of countries led more than 75 % of their research; while in 10 countries, under 25 % of publications had a local first author. Researchers at LMIC institutions led 56.6 % (1297) of all papers, but only 26.8 % of systematic reviews (65/243), 29.9 % of modelling studies (44/147), and 33.2 % of articles in journals with an Impact Factor ≥5 (61/184). Sub-Saharan Africa authors led 54.2 % (538/993) of studies in the region, while 73.4 % did in Latin America and the Caribbean (223/304). Authors affiliated with United States (561) and United Kingdom (207) institutions together account for a third of publications. Around two thirds of USAID and European Union funded studies had high-income country leads, twice as many as that of Wellcome Trust and Rockefeller Foundation.ConclusionsThere are marked gaps in data ownership and these have not diminished over time. Increased locally-led publications, however, does suggest a growing capacity in LMIC institutions to analyse and articulate research findings. Differences in author attribution between funders might signal important variations in funders’ expectations of authorship and discrepancies in how funders understand collaboration. More stringent authorship oversight and reconsideration of authorship guidelines could facilitate growth in LMIC leadership. Left unaddressed, deficiencies in research ownership will continue to hinder alignment between the research undertaken and knowledge needs of LMICs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12992-016-0172-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.