Empirical Evaluation of India's Healthcare System

Introduction to the Evolving Healthcare Landscape

The Indian healthcare system represents a highly complex, deeply fragmented, and rapidly evolving network of public, private, and non-profit service providers catering to a population of over 1.4 billion individuals.1 Over the past two decades, the nation has achieved commendable milestones in the realm of public health, marking notable progress in enhancing life expectancy, curbing fertility rates, and mitigating maternal and child mortality rates.2 As the country embarks on a strategic macroeconomic journey to attain developed nation status by 2047—a vision encapsulated by the "Viksit Bharat" framework—the healthcare sector has emerged as a pivotal element for inclusive growth, sustainable development, and economic resilience.2

However, despite focused efforts to meet the targets set under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the landscape remains ensnared in a web of structural fragmentations. These fragmentations span healthcare service provision, financing mechanisms, risk-pooling through insurance, the standardization of health information technology, and the rigorous enforcement of quality-of-care standards.1 The system is concurrently grappling with a profound epidemiological transition characterized by a dual disease burden: the persistent challenge of communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional diseases, coupled with a rapidly escalating crisis of non-communicable diseases (NCDs).1

This empirical evaluation provides a comprehensive, rigorous analysis of the system’s performance across five critical dimensions: population health outcomes, service accessibility, financial protection, care quality, and the efficiency of resource allocation. By synthesizing empirical data from national surveys, macroeconomic indices, health economic evaluations, and public policy reviews, this report elucidates the underlying mechanisms driving current health sector performance. It critically examines the causal relationships between fiscal inputs, structural capacities, and ultimate health outcomes, identifying both the systemic gains achieved over the past decade and the persistent bottlenecks that threaten the sustainability of India's health architecture.5

Population Health Outcomes and Epidemiological Transitions

The assessment of population health outcomes in India reveals a heterogeneous landscape marked by significant improvements in aggregate indicators, offset by deep-rooted regional, socioeconomic, and gender disparities. The nation's epidemiological profile is undergoing a rapid, multi-dimensional shift, necessitating an evolving public health response.

Nutritional Indicators and Child Health Failures

Child growth failure (CGF) remains a critical indicator of population health, reflecting historical deficits in nutrition, maternal health, and environmental sanitation. Data from successive rounds of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) indicate a gradual but uneven decline in malnutrition parameters. The prevalence of stunting in children under five years of age decreased from 48.0% in NFHS-3 (2005-06) to 38.4% in NFHS-4 (2015-16), and further to 35.5% in NFHS-5 (2019-21).7 Despite this aggregate decline, the absolute burden remains alarmingly high on a global scale.

Geospatial and subnational analyses highlight severe inequalities that dictate these outcomes. In 2017, district-level stunting prevalence ranged extensively from 16.4% to 62.8%, with 36.1% of all Indian districts reporting a stunting prevalence of 40% or more.8 These high-burden districts are predominantly concentrated in low Socio-demographic Index (SDI) states, establishing a direct correlation between regional economic development, female education, and pediatric health.8 Wasting, an indicator of acute malnutrition, also demonstrates persistent regional variations. Districts in Maharashtra (such as The Dangs, Dhule, and Chandrapur) and Bihar reported wasting rates approaching or exceeding 38%, underscoring acute localized vulnerabilities to food insecurity and infectious disease.9

The determinants of these nutritional outcomes are deeply intersectional. Advanced econometric analyses utilizing the Kitigawa-Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition method on NFHS data demonstrate that children from impoverished households, with mothers lacking formal education, and belonging to marginalized social groups (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) face significantly compounded risks of stunting.10 The interplay of wealth, maternal education, and rural residence accounts for the vast majority of the explained variance in child growth failure.10 Furthermore, increasing absolute inequalities exist by caste; historical data shows immunization coverage and nutritional adequacy diverging significantly between scheduled tribes, scheduled castes, and other demographic groups.11 This indicates that health outcomes are inextricable from broader socioeconomic development and require multi-sectoral interventions that address both proximal dietary intakes and distal social determinants.

The Escalating Crisis of Non-Communicable Diseases

India is experiencing a severe escalation in Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs), driven by rapid urbanization, shifting demographic profiles toward an aging population, and evolving lifestyle paradigms. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data indicates that the ratio of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) from NCDs compared to communicable diseases has inverted dramatically over the past three decades.4 By 2025, the elderly will account for an estimated 11% of India's citizenry, further accelerating the incidence of chronic conditions.5

A striking feature of India's NCD burden is its geographic and demographic divergence, creating a complex "dual burden" of disease. Empirical reviews of the National Noncommunicable Disease Monitoring Survey (NNMS) and the ICMR-INDIAB study reveal that rural populations exhibit higher prevalences of behavioral risk factors, notably tobacco use—which stands at 42.7% in rural men versus 28.8% in urban men—and alcohol consumption.12 Conversely, urban populations are disproportionately affected by metabolic risks, including physical inactivity, hypertension, diabetes, and raised blood sugar.12 However, metabolic risks are rapidly penetrating rural areas, as evidenced by rising obesity rates among rural women, signaling a profound nutritional transition where undernutrition coexists with overnutrition.12

The oncological burden represents a particularly acute threat to population health and economic stability. Projections indicate that the number of cancer cases in India will rise by a significant 13%, from 1.39 million in 2020 to 1.57 million by 2025.13 The corresponding cancer burden is projected to grow from 27 million DALYs in 2021 to nearly 30 million by 2025.13 Despite this escalating crisis, participation in preventive screening under the National Program for Non-Communicable Diseases (NP-NCD) remains critically low. Data from NFHS-5 reveals that only 1.9% and 0.9% of women aged 30 to 49 have ever been screened for cervical and breast cancer, respectively, while a mere 1.2% of men have undergone oral cancer screening.14 This massive screening deficit virtually guarantees that the majority of NCD cases are diagnosed at advanced, harder-to-treat stages, severely compromising survivorship and driving up catastrophic healthcare expenditures.14

Encouragingly, targeted research and intervention programs are demonstrating localized success. During the 2024-25 fiscal year, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) heavily prioritized NCD management, achieving a 99.99% budget utilization rate to fund critical research.16 Through the India Hypertension Control Initiative (IHCI), over 20 lakh patients were enrolled, with surveillance data revealing that 47% of these patients successfully achieved blood-pressure control.16 This success illustrates the potential of embedding structured quality-improvement models within primary care systems to manage the NCD epidemic effectively.16

Mental Health Morbidity and the Treatment Gap

Mental health remains one of the most structurally neglected domains of population health in India. The National Mental Health Survey (NMHS) reported an overall current mental health morbidity of 10.6%, with common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression, anxiety, and substance abuse accounting for a 10% prevalence.17 The treatment gap for mental disorders is staggering, ranging between 70% and 92% depending on the specific disorder, with an average gap of 83%.17

The systemic inability to manage mental health is rooted in severe workforce shortages and enduring social stigma. The density of mental health professionals remains abysmally low, with the number of psychiatrists ranging from 0.05 per 100,000 population in states like Madhya Pradesh to just 1.2 per 100,000 in Kerala.17 Although the District Mental Health Program aimed to integrate psychiatric services with general health services, it has largely remained a "psychiatrist-oriented" program, failing to transfer care effectively to general medical officers.17

Recent policy interventions outlined in the Economic Survey 2024-25 have attempted to bridge this divide. Initiatives include the establishment of 25 Centers of Excellence for advanced treatment and postgraduate training, the integration of mental health services into Ayushman Bharat Health & Wellness Centres, and the expansion of digital mental health services like Tele MANAS.19 Furthermore, the ongoing execution of NMHS 2 aims to gather contemporary longitudinal data, assess socioeconomic impacts, and formulate targeted strategies for vulnerable populations, indicating a renewed policy focus on psychiatric epidemiology.20

Climate Change and Population Health Vulnerabilities

An emerging threat to population health outcomes in India is the rapidly changing climate, which threatens to undermine decades of public health gains. The Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change 2024 report highlights that individuals in India are facing record-breaking threats to survival. In 2023, individuals were exposed to a moderate or higher risk of heat stress for an average of 2,400 hours per year—equivalent to 100 days—during light outdoor activities.21 From 2014 to 2023, each infant and adult over age 65 was exposed to an average of 7.7 and 8.4 heatwave days per year, respectively.21 This exposure exacerbates underlying cardiovascular and respiratory morbidities, increasing acute healthcare demand. Concurrently, changing climatic conditions have grown increasingly suitable for the spread of vector-borne diseases such as dengue and malaria, necessitating a paradigm shift in public health surveillance and health system adaptation strategies.21

Service Accessibility, Infrastructure, and Human Resources

Achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) necessitates equitable access to a competent health workforce, robust physical infrastructure, and reliable supply chains. The UHC Service Coverage Index for India has shown gradual improvement, currently standing at 69.0 out of 100 as of 2023.22 While this represents a significant increase from an index score of 38.0 in 2000, India still lags behind peer nations and advanced economies, indicating that substantial populations remain without full coverage for essential health services.23 The global median sits higher, and billions globally still lack access to continuous care, underscoring the universal challenge of service provision.24

Health Workforce Density, Distribution, and Skill-Mix

The availability, quality, and distribution of Human Resources for Health (HRH) represent perhaps the most critical bottleneck in India’s healthcare delivery architecture. Official administrative data from the National Health Workforce Account (NHWA) suggests a seemingly adequate "stock" of registered professionals, counting 1.38 million registered allopathic doctors and 3.94 million nursing personnel.26 Based on these gross stock figures, the theoretical doctor-to-population ratio is 1:811, which appears to exceed the World Health Organization (WHO) standard of 1:1000.26

However, empirical analyses using labor-force data from the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) reveal a starkly different reality regarding the "active" workforce. While the stock density of allopathic doctors is estimated at 8.8 per 10,000 persons, the density of those actively participating in the labor market drops to 6.1 per 10,000.27 Crucially, when these figures are adjusted for adequate medical qualifications, the active density plummets to just 5.0 doctors and 6.0 nurses/midwives per 10,000 population.27 These active, qualified estimates fall drastically below the WHO minimum threshold of 44.5 professional health workers per 10,000 population required to achieve fundamental UHC objectives.27

Furthermore, the workforce is characterized by severe geographic and sectoral maldistribution. Sustained under-investment in the public health system has catalyzed an overwhelming concentration of medical professionals in urban areas and the private sector, leaving rural demographics and public facilities chronically understaffed.27

Note: Data derived from NHWA 2018 and NSSO 2017-18 estimates.27

The skill-mix ratio (nurses to doctors) is highly erratic and frequently inverted compared to international best practices. The national average nurse-to-doctor ratio is estimated at 1.7:1 based on active workforce data.27 While states like Punjab and Delhi exhibit healthier ratios of 7.1:1 and 4.8:1 respectively, states such as Bihar (0.5:1) and Jammu & Kashmir (0.6:1) exhibit acute imbalances where doctors outnumber nurses.27 This top-heavy clinical workforce structure severely undermines the capacity to deliver routine primary, preventive, and rehabilitative care, forcing highly trained physicians to perform tasks that could be delegated to nursing staff, thereby reducing overall system efficiency.27 Additionally, an estimated 20% of qualified health professionals are not active in the labor market, reflecting systemic issues in recruitment, retention, working conditions, and the gendered dimensions of healthcare labor.27

Socioeconomic and Gender Inequities in Utilization

Service accessibility is not solely a function of physical infrastructure but is heavily mediated by socioeconomic status, gender, and caste. Empirical evidence utilizing the Human Opportunity Index (HOI) derived from NFHS-5 data demonstrates profound disparities. The HOI for healthcare utilization ranged from 62.0 for the poorest wealth index (WI I) to 85.0 for the wealthiest (WI V) at the national level.32 In 93.3% of Indian states, the ratio of opportunity for the poorest compared to the wealthiest was less than 1, indicating systemic pro-rich biases in service utilization.32

Analyses of maternal healthcare utilization employing Andersen's Behavioral Model reveal that pregnant women from Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) have significantly lower odds of completing full Antenatal Care (ANC) visits compared to women from other social groups, even when adjusting for age and residence.33 The primary barriers reported include geographical distance to facilities (32.03%), financial difficulties (27.07%), and transportation deficits (23.95%).33 These findings underscore that attaining equitable access requires integrated, demand-side interventions such as direct cash transfers, mobile health units, and targeted system support to mitigate the multifaceted barriers faced by socially excluded groups.

Digital Health Interventions and Telemedicine

To circumvent geographical barriers and extreme workforce shortages, the Government of India has aggressively scaled digital health interventions, most notably under the Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission (ABDM). The flagship telemedicine initiative, eSanjeevani, represents the world's largest government-led telemedicine platform, designed to integrate seamlessly with primary healthcare delivery.35 Between its national rollout in November 2019 and September 2023, the platform facilitated over 163 million consultations across all states and union territories.35

The vast majority (over 93%) of these consultations occurred through the provider-assisted eSanjeevani Ayushman Bharat - Health and Wellness Center (AB-HWC) model.35 In this hub-and-spoke architecture, a Community Health Officer (CHO) at a rural primary care facility connects a patient to a specialized doctor at a higher-level hub. This model has proven particularly effective in serving women and adults aged 25–45, supporting consultations for both acute illnesses and chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes.35

However, empirical evaluations and qualitative stakeholder analyses highlight significant operational and design frictions that limit the platform's ultimate efficacy. Critical bottlenecks include the sub-optimal integration of general practitioners within tele-referral pathways, inadequate digital and clinical training for frontline health workers leading to inappropriate triage, frequent technological disruptions, and a distinct lack of mechanisms for re-referrals and longitudinal feedback loops.37 While telemedicine successfully bridges spatial divides and expands immediate access, its long-term potential to improve population health is constrained by the physical limitations of the primary care endpoints, such as the inability to dispense prescribed medications locally and challenges in ensuring continuity of care.37 Reimagining eSanjeevani requires robust capacity building, enhanced Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and deeper integration with national health programs.37

Preventive Care and Immunization Coverage

Preventive care accessibility, particularly childhood immunization, has been a sustained focus of public health policy through the Universal Immunization Programme (UIP) and the targeted Mission Indradhanush initiatives. By conducting intense, micro-planned catch-up campaigns, Mission Indradhanush has vaccinated over 54.6 million children and 13.2 million pregnant women who were previously unreached or partially vaccinated.39

Consequently, Full Immunization Coverage (FIC) increased significantly by 14.4 percentage points, rising from 62.0% in NFHS-4 (2015-16) to 76.4% in NFHS-5 (2019-21).40 The dosage-response relationship of the policy is evident: districts that executed five or more rounds of the intensified mission experienced maximum coverage increases exceeding 20%.40 Recent WHO/UNICEF data from 2024 further indicates a remarkable 43% reduction in the number of "zero-dose" children in India, dropping from 1.6 million in 2023 to 0.9 million in 2024.41

Despite these aggregate successes, independent coverage evaluation surveys suggest that administrative reporting mechanisms may sometimes overestimate actual community coverage levels.42 Localized pockets of vaccine hesitancy, logistical failures in the cold chain, and the disruption of routine Village Health and Nutrition Days (VHNDs) necessitate continued vigilance and the rollout of strategic frameworks like the Zero Dose Implementation Plan 2024 to target the remaining high-burden districts.39

Financial Protection and Healthcare Financing

The architecture of healthcare financing in India has historically been characterized by severe chronic underfunding of the public sector, fragmented risk pools, and a heavy reliance on unregulated private providers. This systemic design has resulted in exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenditure (OOPE), pushing millions into poverty annually. However, in recent years, an explicit macroeconomic policy shift toward demand-side financing and expanded public provisioning has begun to alter this dynamic fundamentally.

Macroeconomic Trajectories and Public Health Expenditure

Analyses of the latest National Health Accounts (NHA) estimates (2020-21 and 2021-22) reveal a highly positive trajectory in national macro-financial indicators. Total Government Health Expenditure (GHE) as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased from a historical baseline of 1.13% in 2014-15 to 1.84% in 2021-22.43 Concurrently, the government's share in Total Health Expenditure (THE) expanded significantly from 29.0% to 48.0% over the same period.43

This augmented public investment—bolstered by an 85% increase in the central budget allocation for the Department of Health & Family Welfare between 2017-18 and 2024-25, alongside massive health grants mandated by the 15th Finance Commission—has precipitated a steady decline in OOPE.44 As a percentage of THE, OOPE plummeted from a staggering 64.2% in 2013-14 to 39.4% in 2021-22.43 Per capita government spending on healthcare has effectively tripled during this timeframe, signaling a strong political commitment to financial risk protection.43

Despite this positive momentum, India's public health expenditure remains vastly lower than global benchmarks and falls short of the ambitious 2.5% of GDP target outlined in the National Health Policy of 2017.46 In comparison, OECD countries average 7.6% of GDP on health, while peer nations in the BRICS bloc average 3.6%.46 Predictive models utilizing exponential smoothing indicate that while most BRICS nations will see continued rises in health spending, India's expenditure as a share of GDP requires sustained political will to prevent stagnation post-2030.47

Note: Data extracted from National Health Accounts Estimates for India 2020-21.45

The Burden of Catastrophic and Distress Financing

While the aggregate reduction in OOPE is a positive macroeconomic indicator, it masks deep structural inequities in financial risk protection at the household level. Sustainable Development Goal target 3.8.2 emphasizes protection against Catastrophic Health Expenditure (CHE). Cross-sectional analyses of the NSSO 75th round (2017-18) data on morbidity and healthcare indicate pervasive wealth-related inequalities in the incidence of CHE for hospitalization care, with a profound gap between the poorest and richest quintiles.48

When OOPE exceeds a household's capacity to pay from current income, families resort to "distress financing"—defined as utilizing non-income or non-savings methods, such as borrowing at exorbitant interest rates from informal lenders or selling productive assets, to pay for medical care.49 Distress financing remains a major, destructive coping mechanism, particularly among Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and households with lower educational attainment.50 States with weaker public healthcare infrastructure and higher baseline poverty, such as Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and Rajasthan, exhibit the highest incidence of distress financing, particularly in rural settings.50

Alarmingly, regression analyses demonstrate that even among households possessing some form of health insurance, the reliance on distress financing persists.50 This indicates that the depth and breadth of current insurance coverage are frequently insufficient to mitigate the true economic shock of severe illness, leading to deep impoverishment. The dynamic nature of poverty means that health shocks not only deepen existing poverty but push previously secure households below the poverty line, complicating the targeting mechanisms of state-sponsored welfare programs.51

Empirical Assessment of Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY

To combat these impoverishing health expenditures, the government launched the Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Aarogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) in 2018. PM-JAY is one of the world's largest tax-funded health assurance schemes, theoretically providing coverage of up to INR 500,000 per vulnerable family per year for secondary and tertiary hospitalization across a network of empanelled public and private providers.1

Empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of PM-JAY presents a nuanced, highly contextual picture. Primary case-control studies conducted in states like Haryana demonstrate that the scheme effectively reduces OOPE at the point of admission. For enrolled beneficiaries, the median OOPE after hospital admission dropped to zero, indicating that at least half of the participants paid nothing out-of-pocket for inpatient care, compared to substantial expenditures reported prior to the scheme's activation.54

However, broader systematic reviews assessing population-level impacts on overall healthcare utilization and financial risk protection yield mixed results, with some early studies showing no statistically significant macro-level effect on total utilization or ultimate financial protection across the wider population.56 This discrepancy is likely driven by several factors: low baseline awareness of eligibility, the slow and uneven empanelment of private hospitals in remote geographical areas, and the fundamental design limitation that PM-JAY primarily covers inpatient care. Consequently, beneficiaries remain exposed to the cumulative OOPE of outpatient visits, diagnostics, and long-term pharmaceutical management, which constitute the bulk of lifetime healthcare costs for chronic NCDs like chronic kidney disease and ischemic heart disease.15

Encouragingly, the administration of PM-JAY is increasingly transitioning toward rigorous, evidence-based policymaking. Revisions to Health Benefit Packages (HBPs) and provider reimbursement rates are progressively incorporating Health Technology Assessment (HTA) principles and empirical costing evidence derived from national studies. This marks a vital shift away from arbitrary price-setting towards scientifically grounded strategic purchasing, although capacity deficits in understanding HTA principles at the state implementation level persist.58

Administrative Costs and Institutional Efficiency

The efficiency of healthcare financing is also dictated by administrative overheads and the institutional design of insurance rollouts. Empirical studies on older schemes like the Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY) and private Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) reveal that administrative costs can consume a significant portion of total revenue if risk pools are fragmented and claims-processing systems are inefficient.59 Standardizing health services, reducing the number of overlapping multi-payer structures, and enforcing strict standard treatment protocols are essential interventions to curtail administrative wastage, control fraudulent provider behavior, and maximize the proportion of funds directed toward actual patient care.61

Quality of Care: Clinical Adherence and Standardization

The Indian healthcare sector is characterized by an immense, almost unparalleled variance in quality. It encompasses globally acclaimed corporate hospitals that drive a booming medical tourism industry—attracted by highly skilled specialists and cost-effective advanced technology—alongside severely under-resourced public facilities and unregulated private clinics that deliver unacceptably low-quality care.1 Addressing this "know-do" gap in clinical quality is as critical as expanding physical access.

Public Versus Private Sector Quality Dynamics

A defining feature of patient behavior in India is the widespread preference for private healthcare, even among lower-income demographics. Qualitative and empirical studies investigating healthcare utilization patterns reveal complex, mixed perceptions: government facilities are generally lauded for absolute affordability and recent improvements in physical infrastructure, whereas private hospitals are overwhelmingly preferred for perceived higher clinical quality, faster access, and personalized attention, despite the severe financial burden they impose.15

However, objective empirical assessments of clinical quality frequently contradict these public perceptions. Systematic reviews evaluating private versus public sector performance in low- and middle-income countries suggest that while private providers consistently offer greater timeliness and hospitality, they frequently violate standard medical protocols.65 The private sector exhibits profound perverse incentives, resulting in higher rates of unnecessary diagnostic testing, irrational pharmaceutical prescription, and unwarranted surgical interventions.65

Sophisticated studies utilizing standardized clinical vignettes to evaluate provider competence across five tracer conditions (tuberculosis, childhood diarrhea, pre-eclampsia, heart attack, and asthma) demonstrate profound gaps in clinical guideline adherence across both sectors.67 The highly variable quality of medical education and the proliferation of informal or minimally qualified providers in the fragmented private sector contribute directly to high rates of misdiagnosis, inadequate management of chronic diseases, and the dangerous over-prescription of antibiotics, fueling antimicrobial resistance.65 Furthermore, observational studies on NCD management reveal that while adherence to treatment can be moderately high for diabetes (70.1%), it drops drastically for conditions like hypertension, severely exacerbated by the frequent stockouts of essential generic medications in public hospitals and the prohibitive costs of branded drugs in private facilities.15

Quality Assurance Frameworks and Accreditation

To combat the vast disparities in service quality, efforts to standardize care protocols are accelerating at both the state and national levels. In the public sector, the rollout of the National Quality Assurance Standards (NQAS) attempts to enforce rigorous protocols spanning clinical guidelines, structural safety, informed patient consent, and service continuity.68

In the private and corporate sectors, accreditation by the National Accreditation Board for Hospitals & Healthcare Providers (NABH) has demonstrated tangible, measurable clinical benefits. Systematic reviews tracking indicators before and after accreditation show that NABH-accredited hospitals experience a 40% improvement in infection control compliance, a 20% reduction in discharge delays, a 25% rise in patient satisfaction scores, and a highly significant statistical decrease in hospital-acquired infections (p < 0.05).69 Furthermore, structured operational policies enhance overall service quality and boost staff job satisfaction.69 However, the initial capital costs of compliance and the administrative burden of maintaining accreditation restrict these benefits primarily to large, well-resourced tertiary centers, leaving smaller nursing homes largely unregulated.

Digital Decision Support Systems (CDSS)

The integration of Health Information Technology (HIT), particularly Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) linked to Electronic Health Records (EHR), offers a highly scalable, systemic solution to the clinical adherence deficit. CDSS algorithms can guide providers—especially those in rural areas or with lower tiers of training—toward evidence-based diagnoses, optimal pharmaceutical selections, and correct referral pathways, thereby reducing medical errors.67

Despite India's rapid adoption of digital tools, the uptake of advanced CDSS remains severely limited. Empirical evidence identifies major barriers, including profound infrastructure constraints, low provider awareness, poor underlying data quality, resistance from medical professionals accustomed to autonomous practice, and a lack of seamless interoperability between fragmented EHR platforms.67 Strategic investments in robust IT infrastructure and tighter integration of clinical guidelines into user-friendly digital interfaces are imperative to standardize the quality of care across the public-private divide.70

Efficiency of Resource Allocation and System Design

Given the constrained fiscal space for health in India, the efficiency with which financial and human resources are converted into health outputs is of paramount importance. Empirical health economic evaluations reveal severe inefficiencies within the delivery apparatus, highlighting massive potential for optimizing resource allocation.

Technical Efficiency of Public Health Facilities

The technical efficiency of health systems measures the ability of a facility to maximize outputs (such as patient consultations, surgeries, and immunizations) for a given set of inputs (beds, medical staff, diagnostic equipment, and budget). Health economic evaluations utilizing Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA) and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) reveal significant performance gaps across the public health network.

Assessments of district hospitals—the critical backbone of secondary care—reveal an average Technical Efficiency (TE) score ranging from 0.79 to 0.90.71 This implies that fully half of the evaluated district hospitals operate inefficiently. These technically inefficient hospitals could theoretically produce approximately 21% more health outputs utilizing their current level of inputs, simply by optimizing internal management, reducing absenteeism, and streamlining clinical workflows.71 Furthermore, scale efficiency scores suggest that 65% of district hospitals operate at an inefficient scale—either too small to achieve necessary economies of scale, or too large, thereby suffering from bureaucratic diseconomies and administrative bloat.71

The inefficiency is even more pronounced at the primary care level. DEA evaluations of Primary Health Centres (PHCs) demonstrate that over 60% operate inefficiently, with an average TE score of just 0.65.72 This denotes that inefficient PHCs could theoretically reduce their current input endowments by a massive 35% without diminishing their actual service output.72 This highlights profound resource wastage driven by supply chain bottlenecks, human resource maldistribution, and poor localized management. Addressing facility-level service readiness—particularly for chronic NCDs, which is currently very low—is critical; empirical models indicate that a unit increase in disease-specific service readiness directly stimulates higher outpatient utilization, thereby rapidly improving overall allocative efficiency.74

Allocative Efficiency: The Strategic Shift to Primary Care

From a macroeconomic allocative efficiency perspective, health economic theory dictates that investments in primary and preventive care yield substantially higher marginal returns than expenditures on specialized tertiary curative care. The Indian government has explicitly recognized this imperative through the Ayushman Bharat program, specifically the Comprehensive Primary Health Care (CPHC) component, which aims to upgrade existing sub-centers and PHCs into Ayushman Arogya Mandirs (AAMs).44 This initiative expanded the basket of free primary services from 6 to 12, encompassing NCD screening, palliative and rehabilitative care, basic oral, eye, and ENT care, alongside essential drugs and diagnostics.75

Macro-fiscal data reflects this strategic pivot. Over the last decade, the proportion of total government health spending allocated to primary care has increased from 41% to over 51%.77 However, normative policy frameworks suggest that primary care should command at least two-thirds (66%) of the total public health budget to maximize population health returns.77 Disaggregated analysis of current primary care expenditure shows that 41% is consumed by medicines and 29% by curative care, leaving only 15% dedicated to purely preventive, population-health interventions.78 To meet national and international SDG targets, empirical estimates suggest an additional, dedicated investment of 0.7% of GDP strictly targeted toward primary care is required.78 Currently, out of pocket expenditures on secondary and tertiary care dominate, indicating a systemic failure to resolve illnesses at the primary level.48

Federalism, Fiscal Health, and State-Level Disparities

India’s quasi-federal institutional architecture delegates "public health and sanitation; hospitals and dispensaries" to the State List of the Constitution. This means that while the central government designs national frameworks (like the National Health Mission and PM-JAY) and provides vital co-financing, the actual implementation, human resource deployment, and the majority of funding are the direct responsibilities of individual state governments.79 This structural design has led to vastly divergent marginal returns on health spending across jurisdictions.

Panel data estimations using fixed-effects models confirm that per capita public health expenditure exerts a highly favorable, statistically significant effect on life expectancy and infant mortality reduction at the state level.81 However, the income elasticity of public health expenditure is greater than one, indicating that health behaves as a "luxury good" at the macroeconomic level in India.82 Consequently, wealthier states invest disproportionately more in health infrastructure than poorer states, exacerbating historical inequities.82 Vector Error Correction Models (VECM) further demonstrate that public health expenditure has a more pronounced impact on human development at lower levels of economic development, owing to diminishing marginal returns in higher-income settings, yet it is the low-income states that lack the fiscal space to invest.83

The NITI Aayog SDG India Index 2023-24 perfectly encapsulates this entrenched disparity. Overall state scores for Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being) range broadly from a low of 57 to a high of 79.84 While the aggregate national score improved remarkably from 52 in 2018 to 77 in 2023-24 84, performance remains tightly clustered by region and historical development. Southern states (such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu) alongside western states like Gujarat and Maharashtra consistently dominate the upper quartiles, exhibiting superior health indicators, higher healthcare utilization, and greater technical efficiency.33 Conversely, northern and central Empowered Action Group (EAG) states, alongside highly vulnerable Himalayan states experiencing acute fiscal stress and debt sustainability issues, lag significantly.85

Comparative case studies of social health insurance implementation further demonstrate that progressive program design at the central level cannot overcome weak state-level governance architectures. The effectiveness of schemes like PM-JAY depends heavily on the extent to which local governance mechanisms can contain opportunistic behavior by private actors and navigate administrative lethargy; states with robust existing institutional capacity inherently perform better, widening the equity gap.89

Global Benchmarking and System Efficiency

When placed in a global context, the overall efficiency of the Indian healthcare system reflects the complexities of its scale and funding deficits. In comparative global efficiency indices, such as the Bloomberg Health Care Efficiency Index, nations are ranked based on life expectancy juxtaposed against the relative and absolute per capita cost of health care.91 While precise, up-to-date rankings for India fluctuate, systems that balance robust public funding, strict quality control, and minimal administrative overheads—such as Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan—consistently dominate.93 High-cost, highly fragmented multi-payer systems generally exhibit poorer efficiency.62 India's trajectory suggests that while cost-efficiency is achievable (as demonstrated by localized corporate models like Narayana Health), achieving systemic efficiency requires a dramatic shift toward universal, tax-funded primary care and stringent regulation of private sector quality and pricing.31

Conclusion

The empirical evaluation of the Indian healthcare system reveals a massive, complex sector in the midst of a profound and highly uneven transition. Macroeconomic indicators demonstrate a clear, positive trajectory: total public health expenditure is rising as a percentage of GDP, crippling Out-of-Pocket Expenditures are steadily declining, and digital infrastructure like the Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission is rapidly scaling to bridge geographical divides. The strategic reallocation of resources toward Comprehensive Primary Health Care via Ayushman Arogya Mandirs represents a structurally sound, evidence-based approach to improving allocative efficiency.

However, these systemic macroeconomic gains are continually undermined by deep-rooted structural deficiencies and extreme subnational disparities. The population health burden is rapidly shifting toward a costly, chronic epidemic of non-communicable diseases and mental health morbidities, yet preventive screening rates remain practically negligible, ensuring a future pipeline of advanced, expensive pathologies. The active, qualified health workforce is fundamentally inadequate in absolute size and severely maldistributed in favor of urban, private-sector environments, possessing a highly skewed skill-mix that undermines primary care delivery.

Furthermore, while aggregate financial risk protection is improving, catastrophic and distress financing remain deeply entrenched among marginalized, rural, and lower-caste demographics, indicating that average financial indicators mask severe localized poverty traps. The technical efficiency of the public delivery system remains demonstrably poor, with significant wastage of inputs at both the primary and secondary care levels. Simultaneously, the private sector—while heavily utilized by the population—operates with high variability in clinical guideline adherence, requiring much stronger regulatory oversight, mandatory accreditation, and the systemic adoption of clinical decision support systems.

To achieve Universal Health Coverage and fulfill the ambitious mandate of the Viksit Bharat 2047 vision, the system must aggressively pursue the National Health Policy target of 2.5% of GDP in public health spending. Future strategic investments must prioritize the massive expansion of the active medical workforce (particularly nursing and allied health professionals), enforce rigorous quality accreditation across all private providers, heavily front-load NCD screening within the primary care architecture, and utilize precision public finance mechanisms to eliminate distress financing among the most vulnerable socioeconomic strata. Only through a highly integrated, efficiently governed, and equitably financed federal architecture can India fully harness its demographic dividend and ensure sustainable health security for its population.

Works cited

1. The Transformation of The Indian Healthcare System - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10292032/
2. Decoding India's healthcare landscape | EY, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-in/industries/health/images/ey-decoding-india-s-healthcare-landscape.pdf
3. SDG India Index 2023-24 - NITI Aayog, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2024-07/SDG_India_Index_2023-24.pdf
4. Nations within a nation: variations in epidemiological transition across the states of India, 1990-2016 in the Global Burden of Disease Study - PubMed, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29150201/
5. India Healthcare Roadmap for 2025 - Bain & Company, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.bain.com/insights/india-healthcare-roadmap-for-2025-brief/
6. The Evaluation of Health Systems in India - UN GCNI, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://globalcompact.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/The-Evaluation-of-Health-Systems-in-india.pdf
7. Stunting in under-five year olds, India, NFHS5 2019-2021 - HealthNutritionINDIA, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://healthnutritionindia.in/dashboard/5/1/12
8. Mapping of variations in child stunting, wasting and underweight within the states of India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 2000–2017 - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7264980/
9. Malnutrition among Children - PIB, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1806601
10. Trends in the prevalence and social determinants of stunting in India, 2005–2021: findings from three rounds of the National Family Health Survey - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11009545/
11. Health care and equity in India - PMC - NIH, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3093249/
12. Urban-Rural Health Transitions in India: A Comprehensive Review of Non-communicable Disease Trends and Risk Landscapes - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12431961/
13. Apollo Hospitals Health of the Nation 2024, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.apollohospitals.com/apollo_pdf/Apollo-Health-of-the-Nation-2024.pdf
14. Current Status of Implementation of Cancer Screening Programme in India: A Review of Policies and Practice - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12227947/
15. Health-seeking behavior and healthcare utilization among patients with non-communicable diseases in India: insights from a systematic review - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12661882/
16. Annual Report - Indian Council of Medical Research, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.icmr.gov.in/icmrobject/uploads/Static/1771930940_icmrannualreport2024-25englishversion-2.pdf
17. Closing treatment gap of mental disorders in India: Opportunity in new competency-based Medical Council of India curriculum - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6278227/
18. World Mental Health Day 2024: Enhancing Mental Well-Being at Work, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressNoteDetails.aspx?NoteId=153261&ModuleId=3®=3&lang=1
19. Advancing Mental Healthcare in India | Ministry of Health and Family Welfare | GOI, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.mohfw.gov.in/?q=en/pressrelease-206
20. National Mental Health Survey 2, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://indianmhs.nimhans.ac.in/
21. Health and climate change in India - Lancet Countdown, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://lancetcountdown.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Lancet-Countdown-2024_INDIA.pdf
22. UHC service coverage index - WHO Data, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://data.who.int/indicators/i/3805B1E/9A706FD
23. UHC service coverage index - India - World Bank Open Data, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH_UHC_SCI?locations=IN
24. Universal health coverage (UHC) - World Health Organization (WHO), accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/universal-health-coverage-(uhc)
25. Tracking Universal Health Coverage (UHC): 2025 Global Monitoring Report - World Bank, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/universalhealthcoverage/publication/2025-global-monitoring-report-gmr
26. Update on Health Workforce Availability in Public Health Facilities - Press Release:Press Information Bureau, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2225755®=3&lang=1
27. Size, composition and distribution of health workforce in India: why ..., accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7983088/
28. Number of health professionals/workers per 10000 persons, 2018. Sources - ResearchGate, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Number-of-health-professionals-workers-per-10-000-persons-2018-Sources-estimates-from_fig1_350300435
29. Health workforce status in India: A qualitative analysis of parliamentary questions documented in the last two decades - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12296282/
30. Health workforce in India - images.hindusta, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://images.hindustantimes.com/images/app-images/2021/9/health-workforce.pdf
31. Improving efficiency and reducing fraud in UAE's health insurance market., accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/improving-efficiency-and-reducing-fraud-in-uaes-health-insurance-market-9744.html
32. Population-level trends over a decade in geographical inequality for opportunity in access to maternal care services: a cross-sectional analysis from the National Family Health Surveys in India | BMJ Open, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/14/11/e083922
33. Determinants of Inadequate Antenatal Care Utilization Among Indian Women: Evidence From NFHS-5 Using Andersen's Behavioural - National Journal of Community Medicine, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://njcmindia.com/index.php/file/article/download/5654/2296/24544
34. Caste, Social Inequalities and Maternal Healthcare Services in India: Evidence from the National Family and Health Survey - ResearchGate, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364318131_Caste_Social_Inequalities_and_Maternal_Healthcare_Services_in_India_Evidence_from_the_National_Family_and_Health_Survey
35. Adoption and utilization of India's eSanjeevani national telemedicine service - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12558045/
36. July 2024: How Telemedicine is Redefining Healthcare Access | Center for Global Digital Health Innovation, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://publichealth.jhu.edu/center-for-global-digital-health-innovation/july-2024-how-telemedicine-is-redefining-healthcare-access
37. Reimagining India's National Telemedicine Service to improve access to care - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11422547/
38. Current pattern of use and barriers to implementation of eSanjeevani telemedicine services in Kerala, India | International Journal Of Community Medicine And Public Health, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.ijcmph.com/index.php/ijcmph/article/view/14324
39. India's percentage of Zero-dose children to the total population has declined from 0.11% in 2023 to 0.06% in 2024, positioning it as a global exemplar in child health, as acknowledged by the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation in its 2024 report - PIB, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2140343
40. Mission Indradhanush and Intensified Mission Indradhanush—Success Story of India's Universal Immunization Program and the Role of Mann Ki Baat in Bridging the Immunization Gap - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10795861/
41. WHO/UNICEF 2024 Estimates show significant progress on Immunization in India, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://visionias.in/current-affairs/news-today/2025-07-16/society/whounicef-2024-estimates-show-significant-progress-on-immunization-in-india
42. India: WHO and UNICEF estimates of immunization coverage: 2023 revision - World Health Organization (WHO), accessed on March 28, 2026, https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/country-profiles/immunization/2024-country-profiles/immunization-2024-ind.pdf?sfvrsn=a10c4678_3&download=true
43. Union Health Ministry releases National Health Accounts Estimates for India 2020-21 and 2021-22 - PIB, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2058791
44. Steps taken by the Government to reduce Out-of-Pocket Health Expenditure, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.mohfw.gov.in/?q=en/pressrelease-160
45. national health accounts - estimates for india, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://nhsrcindia.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/NHA%202020-21.pdf
46. Five Years of National Health Policy in India: Critical Analysis of the Public Health Expenditure from 2017 to 2022 and Way Forward - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11633271/
47. Future health expenditure in the BRICS countries: a forecasting analysis for 2035 - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10334532/
48. Decomposing the inequalities in the catastrophic health expenditures on the hospitalization in India: empirical evidence from national sample survey data - Frontiers, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1329447/full
49. Understanding out-of-pocket expenditure in India: a systematic review - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12183295/
50. Distress financing on inpatient health expenditure across States in India - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12821797/
51. Impoverishing effects of out-of-pocket healthcare expenditures in India - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10041239/
52. Health & Wellness Centers to Strengthen Primary Health Care in India: Concept, Progress and Ways Forward - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7340764/
53. Empanelment of health care facilities under Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) in India | PLOS One - Research journals, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0251814
54. A Critical Evaluation of Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana in Bihar - RSIS International, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/uploads/vol12-iss8-pg776-786-202509_pdf.pdf
55. Measuring the Effect of Ayushman Bharat-Pradhan Mantri Jan Aarogya Yojna (AB-PMJAY) on Health Expenditure among Poor Admitted in a Tertiary Care Hospital in the Northern State of India - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11042133/
56. Health insurance awareness and its uptake in India: a systematic review protocol, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/4/e043122
57. Impact of public-funded health insurances in India on health care utilisation and financial risk protection: a systematic review | BMJ Open, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/12/e050077
58. Understanding the extent of economic evidence usage for informing policy decisions in the context of India's national health insurance scheme: Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Aarogya Yojana (PM-JAY) - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11168173/
59. An Empirical Study On The Comparison Between RSBY And AB-PMAJAY Publicly Sponsored Health Insurance Schemes - SEEJPH, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.seejph.com/index.php/seejph/article/download/4586/3022/7008
60. A global overview of health insurance administrative costs: What are the reasons for variations found? | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51608093_A_global_overview_of_health_insurance_administrative_costs_What_are_the_reasons_for_variations_found
61. Effect of Micro Health Insurance on Access and Utilization of Health Services in Karnataka, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://openmedicinejournal.com/VOLUME/1/PAGE/96/FULLTEXT/
62. Estimation of Association between Healthcare System Efficiency and Policy Factors for Public Health - MDPI, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/8/12/2674
63. Quality Of Health Care In India: Challenges, Priorities, And The Road Ahead, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0676
64. “Private Hospitals Generally Offer Better Treatment and Facilities”: Out-of-Pocket Expenditure on Healthcare and the Preference for Private Healthcare Providers in South India - MDPI, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/10/1287
65. Comparative Performance of Private and Public Healthcare Systems in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3378609/
66. A Comparative Study on the Efficiency of Public and Private Health Care Services in India - ijerd, accessed on March 28, 2026, http://www.ijerd.com/paper/vol20-issue7/2007173187.pdf
67. Assessing Quality of Care in India: Considerations for National Reform India Health Systems Project Working Paper #5 - Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://hsph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Quality-of-Care-in-India_working-paper.pdf
68. National Quality Assurance Standards 2024 _revised.pdf, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://qps.nhsrcindia.org/sites/default/files/2024-05/National%20Quality%20Assurance%20Standards%202024%20_revised.pdf
69. Evaluating quality improvement in tertiary care hospital before and after NABH accreditation: a systematic review - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12417434/
70. Clinical Decision Support Systems in Indian Healthcare Settings: Benefits, Barriers, and Future Implications - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12428655/
71. Technical efficiency of public district hospitals in Madhya Pradesh, India: a data envelopment analysis - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3783661/
72. Technical efficiency in primary health care: Does quality matter? - ResearchGate, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/42373066_Technical_efficiency_in_primary_health_care_Does_quality_matter
73. Are India's Primary Health Centres Delivering Quality Care? An Efficiency Evaluation, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://journalajrnh.com/index.php/AJRNH/article/view/158
74. Stochastic frontier approach to efficiency analysis of health facilities in providing services for non-communicable diseases in eight LMICs - PubMed, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36515155/
75. Evaluating the costs, work patterns and efficiency (CORE) of comprehensive primary healthcare (CPHC) in India (The CPHC CORE study): a top-down micro-costing study protocol - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11883549/
76. TELEMEDICINE / e-SANJEEVANI - National Health Systems Resource Centre, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.nhsrcindia.org/sites/default/files/2025-09/Telemedicine%20Final%20Report%202025.pdf
77. Cost of delivering primary healthcare services through public sector in India - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10101352/
78. Methods and Measurement of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Healthcare Expenditures in India During 2013–2014 to 2016–2017 - IDEAS/RePEc, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/inddev/v15y2021i3p379-394.html
79. (PDF) Federalism, Decentralization, and Health Care Policy Reform in India - ResearchGate, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272801358_Federalism_Decentralization_and_Health_Care_Policy_Reform_in_India
80. An Examination of India's Federal System and its Impact on Healthcare, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.orfonline.org/research/indias-federal-impact-on-healthcare
81. How Effective is Public Health Care Expenditure in Improving Health Outcome? An Empirical Evidence from the Indian States - NIPFP, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://nipfp.org.in/media/medialibrary/2020/03/WP_300_2020.pdf
82. Determinants of Public Health Expenditure in India: A State- Level Panel Data Analysis - Migration Letters, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://migrationletters.com/index.php/ml/article/download/7573/4904/19968
83. Human Capital Development and Public Health Expenditure: Assessing the Long-Term Sustainability of Economic Development Models - MDPI, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/6/351
84. SDG India Index 2023-24 - Press Release:Press Information Bureau, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2032857
85. NITI Aayog Health Index 2023 - State-wise List - GeeksforGeeks, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/upsc/niti-aayog-health-index-2023/
86. sdg india index - NITI Aayog, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2020-07/SDX_Index_India_Baseline_Report_21-12-2018.pdf
87. SDG India Index 2023-24: Progress on Sustainable Development Goals - India Briefing, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.india-briefing.com/news/india-sustainable-development-goals-sdg-index-2023-24-33668.html/
88. FISCAL HEALTH INDEX 2025 - NITI Aayog, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2025-01/Fiscal_Health_Index_24012025_Final.pdf
89. Program design, implementation and performance: the case of social health insurance in India | Health Economics, Policy and Law, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/health-economics-policy-and-law/article/program-design-implementation-and-performance-the-case-of-social-health-insurance-in-india/09C4508200E9E1D431FA6FABEBBE80F5
90. Decentralization and health system performance – a focused review of dimensions, difficulties, and derivatives in India - PMC, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5103245/
91. Countries with Most Efficient Health Care - Medical Economics, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/countries-with-most-efficient-health-care-lbj
92. Bloomberg's Global Health Index For 2024 - WorldHealth.net, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://worldhealth.net/news/bloombergs-global-health-index-for-2024/
93. Healthiest Countries 2026 - World Population Review, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/healthiest-countries
94. 30 countries with the best healthcare systems: updated list for 2026 - Immigrant Invest, accessed on March 28, 2026, https://immigrantinvest.com/blog/best-healthcare-countries/