RESUMEN
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, access to health care for people living with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) has been significantly disrupted. Calls have been made to adapt health systems and innovate service delivery models to improve access to care. We identified and summarized the health systems adaptions and interventions implemented to improve NCD care and their potential impact on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We comprehensively searched Medline/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, Global Literature on coronavirus disease, and Web of Science for relevant literature published between January 2020 and December 2021. While we targeted articles written in English, we also included papers published in French with abstracts written in English. Results: After screening 1313 records, we included 14 papers from six countries. We identified four unique health systems adaptations/interventions for restoring, maintaining, and ensuring continuity of care for people living with NCDs: telemedicine or teleconsultation strategies, NCD medicine drop-off points, decentralization of hypertension follow-up services and provision of free medication to peripheral health centers, and diabetic retinopathy screening with a handheld smartphone-based retinal camera. We found that the adaptations/interventions enhanced continuity of NCD care during the pandemic and helped bring health care closer to patients using technology and easing access to medicines and routine visits. Telephonic aftercare services appear to have saved a significant amount of patients' time and funds. Hypertensive patients recorded better blood pressure controls over the follow-up period. Conclusions: Although the identified measures and interventions for adapting health systems resulted in potential improvements in access to NCD care and better clinical outcomes, further exploration is needed to establish the feasibility of these adaptations/interventions in different settings given the importance of context in their successful implementation. Insights from such implementation studies are critical for ongoing health systems strengthening efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 and future global health security threats for people living with NCDs.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Atención a la Salud , Países en Desarrollo , Enfermedades no Transmisibles , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Hipertensión/terapia , Enfermedades no Transmisibles/epidemiología , Enfermedades no Transmisibles/terapia , Pandemias , Atención a la Salud/organización & administración , Atención a la Salud/normas , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/normas , InternacionalidadAsunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano , Atención a la Salud , Programas Nacionales de Salud , Factores Socioeconómicos , Atención a la Salud/economía , Atención a la Salud/normas , Programas de Gobierno/economía , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Humanos , Programas Nacionales de Salud/economía , Programas Nacionales de Salud/normasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Mistreatment, discrimination, and poor psycho-social support during childbirth at health facilities are common in lower- and middle-income countries. Despite a policy directive from the World Health Organisation (WHO), no operational model exists that effectively demonstrates incorporation of these guidelines in routine facility-based maternity services. This early-phase implementation research aims to develop, implement, and test the feasibility of a service-delivery strategy to promote the culture of supportive and dignified maternity care (SDMC) at public health facilities. METHODS: Guided by human-centred design approach, the implementation of this study will be divided into two phases: development of intervention, and implementing and testing feasibility. The service-delivery intervention will be co-created along with relevant stakeholders and informed by contextual evidence that is generated through formative research. It will include capacity-building of maternity teams, and the improvement of governance and accountability mechanisms within public health facilities. The technical content will be primarily based on WHO's intrapartum care guidelines and mental health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) materials. A mixed-method, pre-post design will be used for feasibility assessment. The intervention will be implemented at six secondary-level healthcare facilities in two districts of southern Sindh, Pakistan. Data from multiple sources will be collected before, during and after the implementation of the intervention. We will assess the coverage of the intervention, challenges faced, and changes in maternity teams' understanding and attitude towards SDMC. Additionally, women's maternity experiences and psycho-social well-being-will inform the success of the intervention. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Evidence from this implementation research will enhance understanding of health systems challenges and opportunities around SDMC. A key output from this research will be the SDMC service-delivery package, comprising a comprehensive training package (on inclusive, supportive and dignified maternity care) and a field tested strategy to ensure implementation of recommended practices in routine, facility-based maternity care. Adaptation, Implementation and evaluation of SDMC package in diverse setting will be way forward. The study has been registered with clinicaltrials.gov (Registration number: NCT05146518).
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Servicios de Salud Materna , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Respeto , Inclusión Social , Parto Obstétrico/psicología , Parto Obstétrico/normas , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Humanos , Ciencia de la Implementación , Recién Nacido , Servicios de Salud Materna/organización & administración , Servicios de Salud Materna/normas , Mortalidad Materna , Obstetricia/métodos , Obstetricia/organización & administración , Obstetricia/normas , Pakistán/epidemiología , Parto/psicología , Mortalidad Perinatal , Embarazo , Atención Prenatal/organización & administración , Atención Prenatal/psicología , Atención Prenatal/normas , Sistemas de Apoyo Psicosocial , Salud Pública/métodos , Salud Pública/normasRESUMEN
Racially and ethnically diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities have historically been disproportionately affected by disasters and public health emergencies in the United States. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health established the National Consensus Panel on Emergency Preparedness and Cultural Diversity to provide guidance to agencies and organizations on developing effective strategies to advance emergency preparedness and eliminate disparities among racially and ethnically diverse communities during these crises. Adopting the National Consensus Panel recommendations, the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Health Equity; Language Services; and academic-community partnerships used existing health equity resources and expertise to develop an operational framework to support the organization's COVID-19 response and to provide a framework of health equity initiatives for other academic medical centers. This operational framework addressed policies to support health equity patient care and clinical operations, accessible COVID-19 communication, and staff and community support and engagement, which also supported the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care. Johns Hopkins Medicine identified expanded recommendations for addressing institutional policy making and capacity building, including unconscious bias training for resource allocation teams and staff training in accurate race, ethnicity, and language data collection, that should be considered in future updates to the National Consensus Panel's recommendations.
Asunto(s)
Centros Médicos Académicos/organización & administración , COVID-19/etnología , Desastres/prevención & control , Equidad en Salud/normas , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Defensa Civil/organización & administración , Consenso , Diversidad Cultural , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Humanos , Grupos Minoritarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Formulación de Políticas , Salud Pública/normas , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Participación Social , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaAsunto(s)
COVID-19/etnología , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/organización & administración , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/normas , Financiación Gubernamental/economía , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Programas de Gobierno/economía , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Historia del Siglo XX , Humanos , Pandemias/historiaRESUMEN
The Covid-19 pandemic in the UK has been greatly worsened by the mutation of the virus, which began in the South East and was rapidly spreading and in danger of overwhelming the NHS as hospital admissions and deaths continued to rise. In consequence, the Chief Medical Officers of all four nations supported the UK government's sudden decision to delay the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNtech and Oxford/AstraZeneka vaccines for 12 weeks (instead of 3) so that more people in the most vulnerable population groups would receive a first dose and some immunity sooner. The expectation is that this strategy would reduce hospital admissions and deaths. This article considers key medical and legal issues arising from this decision and discusses inter alia rationing of scarce resources, fairness, whether it is for the greater good, consent, individual human rights, negligence and claims for potential or actual injury.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , Toma de Decisiones , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Jurisprudencia , COVID-19/epidemiología , Programas de Gobierno/métodos , Programas de Gobierno/tendencias , Humanos , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19Asunto(s)
Programas de Gobierno , Trastornos Mentales , Servicios de Salud Mental , Salud Mental , COVID-19 , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Humanos , India , Colaboración Intersectorial , Trastornos Mentales/diagnóstico , Trastornos Mentales/terapia , Salud Mental/normas , Servicios de Salud Mental/organización & administración , Servicios de Salud Mental/normasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION In 2016, the New Zealand Ministry of Health introduced the System Level Measures (SLM) framework as a new approach to health system improvement that emphasised quality improvement and integration. A funding stream that was a legacy of past primary care performance management was repurposed as 'capacity and capability' funding to support the implementation of the SLM framework. AIM This study explored how the capacity and capability funding has been used and the issues and challenges that have arisen from the funding implementation. METHODS Semi-structured interviews with 50 key informants from 18 of New Zealand's 20 health districts were conducted. Interview transcripts were coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS The capacity and capability funding was used in three different ways. Approximately one-third of districts used it to actively support quality improvement and integration initiatives. Another one-third tweaked existing performance incentive schemes and in the remaining one-third, the funding was passed directly on to general practices without strings attached. Three key issues were identified related to implementation of the capacity and capability funding: lack of clear guidance regarding the use of the funding; funding perceived as a barrier to integration; and funding seen as insufficient for intended purposes. DISCUSSION The capacity and capability funding was intended to support collaborative integration and quality improvement between health sector organisations at the district level. However, there is a mismatch between the purpose of the capacity and capability funding and its use in practice, which is primarily a product of incremental and inconsistent policy development regarding primary care improvement.
Asunto(s)
Creación de Capacidad/organización & administración , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Atención Primaria de Salud/organización & administración , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , Creación de Capacidad/economía , Creación de Capacidad/normas , Programas de Gobierno/economía , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Nueva Zelanda , Atención Primaria de Salud/economía , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Administración en Salud Pública , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/economía , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Government of India and the World Health Organization have guidelines for outpatient management of young infants 0-59 days with signs of Possible Serious Bacterial Infection (PSBI), when referral is not feasible. Implementation research was conducted to identify facilitators and barriers to operationalizing these guidelines. METHODS: Himachal Pradesh government implemented the guidelines in program settings supported by Centre for Health Research and Development, Society for Applied Studies. The strategy included community sensitization, skill enhancement of Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHA), Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) and Medical Officers (MOs) to identify PSBI and treat when referral was not feasible. The research team collected information on facilitators and barriers. A technical support unit provided training and oversight. FINDINGS: Among 1997 live births from June 2017 to January 2019, we identified 160 cases of PSBI in young infants resulting in a coverage of 80%, assuming an incidence of 10%. Of these,29(18.1%) had signs of critical illness (CI), 92 (57.5%) had clinical severe infection (CSI), 5 (3.1%)had severe pneumonia (only fast breathing in young infants 0-6 days), while 34 (21%) had pneumonia (only fast breathing in young infants 7-59 days). Hospital referral was accepted by 48/160 (30%), whereas 112/160 (70%) were treated with the simplified treatment regimens at primary level facilities. Of the 29 infants with CI, 18 (62%) accepted referral; 26 (90%) recovered while 3 (10%) who had accepted referral, died. Of the 92 infants who had CSI, 86 (93%) recovered, 65 (71%) received simplified treatment and one infant who had accepted referral, died. All the five infants who had severe pneumonia, recovered; 3 (60%) had received simplified treatment. Of the 34 pneumonia cases, 33 received simplified treatment of which 5 (15%) failed treatment; two out of these 5 died. Overall, 6/160 infants died (case-fatality-rate 3.4%); 2 in the simplified treatment (case-fatality-rate 1.8%) and 4 in the hospital group (case-fatality-rate 8.3%). Delayed identification and care-seeking by families and health system weaknesses like manpower gaps and interrupted supplies were challenges in implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the guidelines in program settings is possible and acceptable. Scaling up would require creating community awareness, early identification and appropriate care-seeking, strengthening ASHA home-visitation program, building skills and confidence of MOs and ANMs, uninterrupted supplies and a dependable referral system.
Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/organización & administración , Infecciones Bacterianas/terapia , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Derivación y Consulta/organización & administración , Atención Ambulatoria/normas , Infecciones Bacterianas/diagnóstico , Infecciones Bacterianas/mortalidad , Femenino , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Visita Domiciliaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Ciencia de la Implementación , India/epidemiología , Lactante , Mortalidad Infantil , Recién Nacido , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Derivación y Consulta/normas , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Rural/estadística & datos numéricos , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
Policy Points Reflecting on current response deficiencies, we offer a model for a national contingency supply chain cell (NCSCC) construct to manage the medical materials supply chain in support of emergencies, such as COVID-19. We develop the following: a framework for governance and response to enable a globally independent supply chain; a flexible structure to accommodate the requirements of state and county health systems for receiving and distributing materials; and a national material "control tower" to improve transparency and real-time access to material status and location. CONTEXT: Much of the discussion about the failure of the COVID-19 supply chain has centered on personal protective equipment (PPE) and the degree of vulnerability of care. Prior research on supply chain risks have focused on mitigating the risk of disruptions of specific purchased materials within a bounded region or on the shifting status of cross-border export restrictions. But COVID-19 has impacted every purchase category, region, and border. This paper is responsive to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recommendation to study and monitor disasters and to provide governments with course of action to satisfy legislative mandates. METHODS: Our analysis draws on our observations of the responses to COVID-19 in regard to acquisition and contracting problem-solving, our review of field discussions and interactions with experts, a critique of existing proposals for managing the strategic national stockpile in the United States a mapping of the responses to national contingency planning phases, and the identification of gaps in current national healthcare response policy frameworks and proposals. FINDINGS: Current proposals call for augmenting a system that has failed to deliver the needed response to COVID-19. These proposals do not address the key attributes for pandemic plan renewal: flexibility, traceability and transparency, persistence and responsiveness, global independence, and equitable access. We offer a commons-based framework for achieving the opportunities and risks which are responsive to a constellation of intelligence assets working in and across focal targets of global supply chain risk. CONCLUSIONS: The United States needs a "commons-based strategy" that is not simply a stockpile repository but instead is a network of repositories, fluid inventories, and analytic monitoring governed by the experts. We need a coordinated effort, a "commons" that will direct both conventional and new suppliers to meet demands and to eliminate hoarding and other behaviors.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Planificación en Desastres/normas , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Política de Salud , Equipo de Protección Personal/provisión & distribución , Equipo de Protección Personal/normas , Reserva Estratégica/normas , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Given the persistence of Indigenous health inequities across national contexts, many countries have adopted strategies to improve the health of Indigenous peoples. Governmental recognition of the unique health needs of Indigenous populations is necessary for the development of targeted programs and policies to achieve universal health coverage. At the same time, the participation of Indigenous peoples in decision-making and program and policy design helps to ensure that barriers to health services are appropriately addressed and promotes the rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determination. Due to similar patterns of Indigenous health and health determinants across borders, there have been calls for greater global collaboration in this field. However, most international studies on Indigenous health policy link Anglo-settler democracies (Canada, Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States), despite these countries representing a small fraction of the world's Indigenous people. AIM: This paper examines national-level policy in Australia, Brazil, Chile and New Zealand in relation to governmental recognition of differential Indigenous health needs and engagement with Indigenous peoples in health. The paper aims to examine how Indigenous health needs and engagement are addressed in national policy frameworks within each of the countries in order to contribute to the understanding of how to develop pro-equity policies within national health care systems. METHODS: For each country, a review was undertaken of national policies and legislation to support engagement with, and participation of, Indigenous peoples in the identification of their health needs, development of programs and policies to address these needs and which demonstrate governmental recognition of differential Indigenous health needs. Government websites were searched as well as the following databases: Google, OpenGrey, CAB Direct, PubMed, Web of Science and WorldCat. FINDINGS: Each of the four countries have adopted international agreements regarding the engagement of Indigenous peoples in health. However, there is significant variation in the extent to which the principles laid out in these agreements are reflected in national policy, legislation and practice. Brazil and New Zealand both have established national policies to facilitate engagement. In contrast, national policy to enable engagement is relatively lacking in Australia and Chile. Australia, Brazil and New Zealand each have significant initiatives and policy structures in place to address Indigenous health. However, in Brazil this is not necessarily reflected in practice and although New Zealand has national policies these have been recently reported as insufficient and, in fact, may be contributing to health inequity for Maori. In comparison to the other three countries, Chile has relatively few national initiatives or policies in place to support Indigenous engagement or recognise the distinct health needs of Indigenous communities. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of international policy frameworks forms an important step in ensuring that Indigenous peoples are able to participate in the formation and implementation of health policy and programs. However, without the relevant principles being reflected in national legislature, international agreements hold little weight. At the same time, while a national legislative framework facilitates the engagement of Indigenous peoples, such policy may not necessarily translate into practice. Developing multi-level approaches that improve cohesion between international policy, national policy and practice in Indigenous engagement in health is therefore vital. Given that each of the four countries demonstrate strengths and weaknesses across this causal chain, cross-country policy examination provides guidance on strengthening these links.
Asunto(s)
Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Política de Salud , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/etnología , Grupos de Población/etnología , Canadá , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Humanos , Participación del PacienteRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The purposes of the study were to estimate the effect of Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA) implementation on dietary quality of all U.S. school-aged children and adolescents and examine whether those effects differed by the demographic group. METHODS: We used survey regression on 2007-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data to estimate the proportion of energy intake from school foods and the association between school food intake and dietary quality, before and after HHFKA passage/implementation. To account for demographic changes in the U.S. population over time, inverse probability weighting was used. The product of the proportion of energy from school foods and the association between school food intake and dietary quality estimated the effect of HHFKA implementation on dietary quality. RESULTS: School food intake quantity remained stable during the study period. HHFKA implementation improved students' dietary quality by 4.3 Healthy Eating Index-2010 points (95% confidence interval: 2.5, 6.1) on days when school foods were eaten and by 1.3 Healthy Eating Index-2010 points (95% confidence interval: 0.73, 1.8) averaged over all days annually. CONCLUSIONS: HHFKA implementation improved the total dietary quality of U.S. school students. U.S. students would benefit from eating school meals in the post-HHFKA era, and HHFKA regulations should not be relaxed.
Asunto(s)
Servicios de Alimentación/legislación & jurisprudencia , Alimentos/normas , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Política Nutricional/legislación & jurisprudencia , Instituciones Académicas/legislación & jurisprudencia , Adolescente , Niño , Dieta , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas Nutricionales , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Política Pública , Estudiantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados UnidosAsunto(s)
Defensa Civil , Infecciones por Coronavirus , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Gobierno , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral , Responsabilidad Social , COVID-19 , Prueba de COVID-19 , Lista de Verificación , Defensa Civil/métodos , Defensa Civil/organización & administración , Defensa Civil/normas , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/economía , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/métodos , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/economía , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Notificación de Enfermedades/economía , Notificación de Enfermedades/métodos , Notificación de Enfermedades/normas , Programas de Gobierno/economía , Programas de Gobierno/organización & administración , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/economía , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/normas , Humanos , Cooperación Internacional , Pandemias/economía , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/economía , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Vigilancia de la Población , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Proyectos de Investigación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Organización Mundial de la Salud/economía , Organización Mundial de la Salud/organización & administraciónRESUMEN
Ten years after its enactment, public support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) still only reaches a scant majority. Candidates for the presidency-and the sitting president-have endorsed health reforms that would radically transition US health care away from the current system upon which the ACA was built. Few opinion surveys to date have captured dominant preferences among alternative health reform policies or characterized attitudes and experiences that might be associated with policy preferences. Using a 2019 nationally representative telephone survey, this article considers how variations in political values, attitudes toward government, and experiences with the health care system relate to competing health reform preferences. Differences between those who favor Medicare for All over building on the ACA largely reflect different levels of satisfaction with the status quo and views of private health insurance. By contrast, differences between ACA supporters and those who would favor replacing it with a state-based alternative reflect sharply different political values and attitudes. Key differences remain significant after controlling for demographic, health, and political characteristics. Overwhelming public support still eludes the ACA, and reaching consensus on future directions for health reform will remain challenging given differences in underlying beliefs.
Asunto(s)
Actitud , Reforma de la Atención de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Reforma de la Atención de Salud/métodos , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Política , Opinión Pública , Adulto , Anciano , Atención a la Salud/normas , Femenino , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage is a key target of the Sustainable Development Goals and quality of care is fundamental to its attainment. In South Africa, the National Health Insurance (NHI) system is a major health financing reform towards universal health coverage. The Ideal Clinic Realisation and Maintenance (ICRM) programme aims to improve the quality of care at primary healthcare level in preparation for NHI system implementation. This study draws on Bressers' Contextual Interaction Theory to explore the wider, structural and specific policy context of the ICRM programme and the influence of this context on policy actors' motivation, cognition and perceived power. METHODS: This was a nested qualitative study, conducted in two NHI pilot districts in the Gauteng and Mpumalanga Provinces of South Africa. Following informed consent, we conducted in-depth interviews with key informants involved in the conceptualisation and implementation of the ICRM programme. The questions focused on ICRM policy context, rationale and philosophy, intergovernmental relationships, perceptions of roles and responsibilities in implementation, ICRM programme resourcing, and implementation progress, challenges and constraints. We used thematic analysis, informed by Bressers' theory, to analyse the data. RESULTS: A total of 36 interviews were conducted with key informants from national, provincial and local government. The wider context of the ICRM programme implementation was the drive to improve the quality of care at primary healthcare level in preparation for NHI. However, the context was characterised by contestations about the roles and responsibilities of the three government spheres and weak intergovernmental relationships. Notwithstanding examples of strong local leadership, the disjuncture between two national quality of care initiatives and resource constraints influenced policy actors' experiences and perceptions of the ICRM programme. They expressed frustrations about the lack of or diffuse accountability and their lack of involvement in decision-making, thus questioning the sustainability of the ICRM programme. CONCLUSIONS: National health sector reforms should consider the context of policy implementation and potential impact on actors' motivation, cognition and power. All relevant policy actors should be involved in policy design and implementation. A clear communication strategy and ongoing monitoring and evaluation are prerequisites for implementation success.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria/normas , Programas de Gobierno/normas , Política de Salud , Gobierno Local , Programas Nacionales de Salud , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Cognición , Toma de Decisiones , Reforma de la Atención de Salud , Humanos , Liderazgo , Motivación , Proyectos Piloto , Formulación de Políticas , Poder Psicológico , Desarrollo de Programa , Investigación Cualitativa , Asignación de Recursos , Responsabilidad Social , Sudáfrica , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de SaludRESUMEN
Is it appropriate for scientists to engage in political advocacy? Some political critics of scientists argue that scientists have become partisan political actors with self-serving financial agendas. However, most scientists strongly reject this view. While social scientists have explored the effects of science politicization on public trust in science, little empirical work directly examines the drivers of scientists' interest in and willingness to engage in political advocacy. Using a natural experiment involving the U.S. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (NSF-GRF), we causally estimate for the first time whether scientists who have received federal science funding are more likely to engage in both science-related and non-science-related political behaviors. Comparing otherwise similar individuals who received or did not receive NSF support, we find that scientists' preferences for political advocacy are not shaped by receiving government benefits. Government funding did not impact scientists' support of the 2017 March for Science nor did it shape the likelihood that scientists donated to either Republican or Democratic political groups. Our results offer empirical evidence that scientists' political behaviors are not motivated by self-serving financial agendas. They also highlight the limited capacity of even generous government support programs to increase civic participation by their beneficiaries.