Correction: Assessment of financial protection mechanisms for tuberculosis services in seven priority countries of the Western Pacific Region: a cross-sectional mixed-methods study

Correction: Tropical Medicine and Health (2026) 54:137 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41182-026-00979-7

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors identified errors in the terminology and in the descriptive text used to define the three health financing typologies that structure the comparative analysis. The typology labels and definitions are the analytical framework of the study, and the wording as published conveys statements that are inconsistent with established health financing concepts and evidence. The specific errors are set out below.

Terminology of the Type 1 typology

The Type 1 typology was labelled "tax-funded". This designation is incorrect as a discriminating label, because general government revenues raised through taxation are the predominant source of public health financing in all seven study countries, including those classified as Type 2 and Type 3. As published, the label implies that tax revenue distinguishes Type 1 from the other typologies, which misrepresents the revenue composition of the systems assessed. The distinguishing feature of Type 1 is the pooling and purchasing arrangement—a budget-financed national health service—not the revenue source. The label has therefore been corrected to "national health service-type" wherever it designates the Type 1 typology, as follows.

Location	Originally published	Corrected to
Abstract, Results	Countries were mapped into three financing typologies: tax-funded systems, government-subsidised mixed systems, and insurance-based pooled systems	Countries were mapped into three financing typologies: national health service-type systems, government-subsidised mixed systems, and insurance-based pooled systems
Background, paragraph 5	…some countries rely predominantly on tax-funded systems…	…some countries rely predominantly on national health service-type systems…
Methods, Data analysis	…three a priori typologies…: tax-funded systems (Type 1), government-subsidised mixed systems (Type 2), and insurance-based pooled systems (Type 3)	…three a priori typologies…: national health service-type systems (Type 1), government-subsidised mixed systems (Type 2), and insurance-based pooled systems (Type 3)
Results, Overview of financing architecture	…(1) tax-funded national health service-type system (Papua New Guinea)…	…(1) national health service-type system (Papua New Guinea)…
Box, Type 1 heading	Type 1. Tax-funded national health service-type system (budget-dominant pooling)	Type 1. National health service-type system
Discussion, paragraph 1	The classification of countries into tax-funded (Type 1), mixed/subsidised (Type 2), and insurance-based (Type 3) systems…	The classification of countries into national health service-type (Type 1), mixed/subsidised (Type 2), and insurance-based (Type 3) systems…
Conclusion, paragraph 2	For tax-funded and government-subsidised systems, this requires closing the diagnostic gap…	For national health service-type and government-subsidised systems, this requires closing the diagnostic gap…

The use of the term "tax-funded" in the Background in reference to the general expansion of publicly financed services (i.e., not as a typology label) is unaffected and remains as published.

Parenthetical descriptors following the typology headings (Box)

Each of the three typology headings in the Box carried a parenthetical descriptor. These descriptors characterise the typologies in terms of the dominance of budget or insurance mechanisms, which is not supported by the pooling and purchasing arrangements documented in the study and reinforces the same misclassification described in section "Terminology of the Type 1 typology". The three descriptors have been deleted.

Location	Originally published	Corrected to
Box, Type 1 heading	Type 1. Tax-funded national health service-type system (budget-dominant pooling)	Type 1. National health service-type system
Box, Type 2 heading	Type 2. Government-subsidised mixed system (budget-dominant with limited insurance purchasing role)	Type 2. Government-subsidised mixed system
Box, Type 3 heading	Type 3. Predominantly insurance-based pooled system (insurance as primary purchasing platform)	Type 3. Predominantly insurance-based pooled system

Description of purchasing mechanisms (Box)

Two statements in the Box incorrectly attribute purchasing methods to the source of financing. Strategic purchasing methods such as capitation, case-based payment and diagnosis-related groups are not specific to social health insurance; they are used in systems financed from general government revenues and administered by public agencies that do not operate as social health insurance funds. As published, the text supports the inference that a health insurance system is a requirement for progress towards universal health coverage, rather than one of several possible pathways. The text has been corrected as follows.

Location	Originally published	Corrected to
Box, Type 1, sentence 2	Purchasing is largely passive, typically through line-item or global budgeting	Purchasing is largely passive, typically through line-item budgeting
Box, Type 3, final sentence	While government subsidies remain important, insurance-based purchasing mechanisms, such as capitation, case-based payment, or DRG systems, play a central role in financing TB service delivery	In the past few decades, pooling multiple revenue sources under insurance schemes in WPR countries has allowed more strategic purchasing mechanisms, such as capitation, case-based payment, or DRG systems, to play a central role in financing TB service delivery

Figure 1

Fig. 1.

Health financing assessment framework. Each TB service domain represents a key node in the continuum of care. TPT denotes preventive treatment for individuals at risk of progression to active disease. Molecular diagnostics include WHO-recommended rapid tests (e.g., Xpert MTB/ RIF). Radiology refers to chest X-ray for screening or diagnostic workup. DS-TB and DR-TB management and care encompass drug regimens, clinical monitoring, and ancillary investigations during the treatment course. Hospitalisation refers to inpatient admission fees and associated charges, whether short-stay or long-term. SHI: social health insurance; TPT: tuberculosis preventive treatment; DS-TB: drug-susceptible tuberculosis; DR-TB: drug-resistant tuberculosis

In Fig. 1 (Health financing assessment framework), the Type 1 box in the "Typologies" panel was labelled "Tax-funded". Consistent with section "Terminology of the Type 1 typology" above, the label has been corrected to "National health service-type". No other element of the figure is affected.

The incorrect Fig. 1 is:

Fig. 1.

Health financing assessment framework. Each TB service domain represents a key node in the continuum of care. TPT denotes preventive treatment for individuals at risk of progression to active disease. Molecular diagnostics include WHO-recommended rapid tests (e.g., Xpert MTB/ RIF). Radiology refers to chest X-ray for screening or diagnostic workup. DS-TB and DR-TB management and care encompass drug regimens, clinical monitoring, and ancillary investigations during the treatment course. Hospitalisation refers to inpatient admission fees and associated charges, whether short-stay or long-term. SHI: social health insurance; TPT: tuberculosis preventive treatment; DS-TB: drug-susceptible tuberculosis; DR-TB: drug-resistant tuberculosis

The correct Fig. 1 is:

Statement

These corrections apply to the terminology and the definitional text of the financing typologies. The data, analyses, country classifications, tables, results and conclusions of the study are unchanged. The original article [1] has been corrected.