0.5
Cite Score
SJR: 0.129 / SNIP: 0.140
JMERC
Owner
Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC) is the owner of IJWPH.
Volume 18, Issue 1 (2026)
J Clin Care Skill 2026, 18(1): 1001-1015 |
Back to browse issues page
Request Type:
History
Received: 2026/05/4 | Accepted: 2026/01/29 | Published: 2026/01/29
Received: 2026/05/4 | Accepted: 2026/01/29 | Published: 2026/01/29
How to cite this article
Health management in war and post-war crises: A systematic review of global evidence for emerging priorities for applied research. J Clin Care Skill 2026; 18 (1) :1001-1015
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-3-85672-en.html
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-3-85672-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Authors
Abstract (110 Views)
Aims: Armed conflicts and post-conflict crises severely disrupt health systems, exacerbate health inequities, and undermine service delivery. This study aimed to systematically review global evidence on health management in war and post-conflict settings and to identify emerging priorities for applied research and policy guidance.
Materials & Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies examining health management interventions, strategies, and system-level responses in war and post-conflict contexts were included. Study selection and data extraction were independently conducted by two reviewers. Of the 900 records identified, 87 studies met the inclusion criteria.
Findings: The findings indicate that health management in war and post-conflict crises is structured around nine interrelated domains: health policy and governance; healthcare service delivery; mental health and psychosocial support; health of vulnerable populations; health information systems and digital technologies; health economics and equity; health workforce education and capacity-building; health system resilience and reconstruction; and legal, ethical, and humanitarian frameworks.
Conclusion: Effective health management in war and post-conflict settings requires integrated, adaptive, and evidence-based approaches that address both immediate humanitarian needs and long-term system recovery. Strengthening crisis-oriented health governance, investing in resilient service delivery models, prioritizing mental health and vulnerable populations, and leveraging digital health innovations should constitute key priorities for future research and policy action.
Materials & Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies examining health management interventions, strategies, and system-level responses in war and post-conflict contexts were included. Study selection and data extraction were independently conducted by two reviewers. Of the 900 records identified, 87 studies met the inclusion criteria.
Findings: The findings indicate that health management in war and post-conflict crises is structured around nine interrelated domains: health policy and governance; healthcare service delivery; mental health and psychosocial support; health of vulnerable populations; health information systems and digital technologies; health economics and equity; health workforce education and capacity-building; health system resilience and reconstruction; and legal, ethical, and humanitarian frameworks.
Conclusion: Effective health management in war and post-conflict settings requires integrated, adaptive, and evidence-based approaches that address both immediate humanitarian needs and long-term system recovery. Strengthening crisis-oriented health governance, investing in resilient service delivery models, prioritizing mental health and vulnerable populations, and leveraging digital health innovations should constitute key priorities for future research and policy action.
Keywords: