Stakeholder perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease control in Kenya: a qualitative study

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the stakeholders' perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease (NCD) control in Kenya. DESIGN: A qualitative study approach conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that followed a deliberative dialogue process. SETTING: Study was conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that was held in October 2019 in Nairobi, Kenya. PARTICIPANTS: Stakeholders who currently participate in the national level policymaking process for health in Kenya. OUTCOME MEASURE: Priority setting process for NCD control in Kenya. RESULTS: Donor funding was identified as a key factor that informed the priority setting process for NCD control. Misalignment between donors' priorities and the country's priorities for NCD control was seen as a hindrance to the process. It was identified that there was minimal utilisation of context-specific evidence from locally conducted research. Additional factors seen to inform the priority setting process included political leadership, government policies and budget allocation for NCDs, stakeholder engagement, media, people's cultural and religious beliefs. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for development aid partners to align their priorities to the specific NCD control priority areas that exist in the countries that they extend aid to. Additionally, context-specific scientific evidence on effective local interventions for NCD control is required to inform areas of priority in Kenya and other low-income and middle-income countries. Further research is needed to develop best practice guidelines and tools for the creation of national-level priority setting frameworks that are responsive to the identified factors that inform the priority setting process for NCD control.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.