Comparing priority received by global health issues: a measurement framework applied to tuberculosis, malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever.

INTRODUCTION: The relative priority received by issues in global health agendas is subjected to impressionistic claims in the absence of objective methods of assessment of priority. To build an approach for conducting structured assessments of comparative priority health issues receive, we expand the public arenas model (2021) and offer a framework for future assessments of health issue priority in global and national health agendas. METHODS: We aimed to develop a more comprehensive set of measures for conducting multiyear priority comparisons of health issues in six agenda-setting arenas by identifying possible measures and data sources, selecting indicators based on feasibility and comparability of measures and gathering the data on selected indicators. We applied these measures to four communicable diseases-tuberculosis (TB), malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever-given their differing impressionistic claims of priority. Where possible, we analysed the annual and/or 5-year trends from 2000 through 2022. RESULTS: We observed that TB and malaria received the highest priority for most periods in the past two decades in most arenas. However, a stagnation in development funding for these two conditions over the last 8-10 years may have fuelled the neglect claims. Despite having a higher disease burden, diarrhoea has been slipping in global priority with reduced spending, fewer clinical trials and stagnating publications. Dengue remains a low-priority condition but has witnessed a sharp rise in attention from the pharmaceutical industry. DISCUSSIONS: We expanded the arenas model by including a transnational arena (international representation) and additional measurements for various arenas. This analysis presents an approach to enable comparative trend analysis of the markers of agenda status over a multiyear period. More such analyses can bring much-desired objectivity in understanding how attention to global or national health issues changes over time in different arenas, potentiating a more equitable allocation of resources.

Exploring the priorities of ageing populations in Pakistan, comparing views of older people in Karachi City and Thatta.

As a lower middle-income country, Pakistan faces multiple issues that influence the course of healthy ageing. Although there is some understanding of these issues and the objective health outcomes of people in Pakistan, there is less knowledge on the perceptions, experiences, and priorities of the ageing population and their caretakers (hereafter, "stakeholders"). The aim of the study was to identify the needs and priorities of older adults and stakeholders across both urban and rural locations. We sought to explore the views of two groups of people, older adults and stakeholders on topics including the definition of ageing as well as areas of importance, services available, and barriers to older people living well. Two-day workshops were conducted in one rural city, Thatta and one urban city, Karachi. The workshops were designed using the Nominal Group Technique, which included plenary and roundtable discussions. The responses were ranked through rounds of voting and a consensus priority list was obtained for each topic and group. Responses were categorized using the socio-ecological framework. Responses were compared between stakeholders and older people and between different geographical areas. 24 urban and 26 rural individuals aged over 60 years and 24 urban and 26 rural stakeholders attended the workshops. There were few areas of agreement with respect to both geographical region and participant group. Comparing older adults' definition of ageing, there was no overlap between the top five ranked responses across urban and rural locations. With respect to areas of importance, there was agreement on free health care as well as financial support. In terms of barriers to healthy ageing, only nation-wide inflation was ranked highly by both groups. In addition, there were relatively few areas of congruence between stakeholder and older adult responses, irrespective of location, although engagement with family, adequate nutrition and monetary benefits were responses ranked by both groups as important for healthy ageing. Both groups ranked issues with the pension system and financial difficulties as barriers. When categorized using the socio-ecological model, across all questions, societal factors were prioritized most frequently (32 responses), followed by individual (27), relationship (15), and environment (14). Overcoming barriers to facilitate healthy ageing will require a multi-faceted approach and must incorporate the priorities of older individuals. Our results may serve as a guide for researchers and policymakers for future engagement and to plan interventions for improving the health of the ageing population in Pakistan.

Ten Priorities for Research Addressing the Intersections of Brain Injury, Mental Health and Addictions: A Stakeholder-Driven Priority-Setting Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to engage key stakeholders in a health research priority-setting process to identify, prioritize and produce a community-driven list of research questions addressing intersectional issues on mental health and addictions (MHA) in acquired brain injury (ABI). METHODS: A multiphasic health research priority-setting process was co-designed and executed with community-based stakeholders, including researchers, health professionals, clinicians, service providers, representatives from brain injury associations, policy makers and people with lived experience of ABI and MHA, including patients and their family members. Stakeholders' ideas led to the generation of research questions, which were prioritized at a 1-day workshop. RESULTS: Fifty-nine stakeholders participated in the priority-setting activity during the workshop, which resulted in a rank-ordered list of the top 10 questions for research addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Questions identified touched on several pressing issues (e.g., opioid crisis, homelessness), encompassed multiple subtypes of ABI (e.g., hypoxic-ischaemic, mild traumatic), and involved different domains (e.g., identification, intervention) of health research. CONCLUSIONS: This community-driven health research priority-setting study identified and prioritized research questions addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Researchers and funding agencies should use this list to inform their agendas and address stakeholders' most urgent needs, fostering meaningful improvements to clinical services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An 11-person working group comprised of people with lived experience, service providers, researchers, healthcare professionals and other key stakeholders collaboratively developed and informed the scope, design, methodology and interpretation of this study. Over 50 community-based stakeholders contributed to the research priority-setting activity. One co-author is a person with lived experience.

Assessing experts' perspectives on challenges in substance misuse prevention, harm reduction, and treatment to shape funding priorities in New York State.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose is a leading cause of death and opioid-related deaths increased by more than 300% from 2010 to 2020 in New York State. Experts holding a range of senior leadership positions from across New York State were asked to identify the greatest challenges in substance misuse prevention, harm reduction, and treatment continuum of care. Expert input was used to shape funding priorities. METHOD: Individual semi-structured interviews of sixteen experts were conducted in April and May 2023. Experts included academics, medical directors, leaders of substance misuse service agencies, administrators of a state agency, a county mental health commissioner, the president of a pharmacy chain, and a senior vice president of an addiction-related national non-profit. Zoom interviews were conducted individually by an experienced qualitative interviewer and were recorded, transcribed, and coded for content. An initial report, with the results of the interviews organized by thematic content, was reviewed by the research team and emailed to the expert interviewees for feedback. RESULTS: The research team identified five major themes: 1. Siloed and fragmented care delivery systems; 2. Need for a skilled workforce; 3. Attitudes towards addiction (stigma); 4. Limitations in treatment access; and 5. Social and drug related environmental factors. Most experts identified challenges in each major theme; over three-quarters identified issues related to siloed and fragmented systems and the need for a skilled workforce. Each expert mentioned more than one theme, three experts mentioned all five themes and six experts mentioned four themes. CONCLUSIONS: Research, educational, and programmatic agendas should focus on identified topics as a means of improving the lives of patients at risk for or suffering from substance use-related disorders. The results of this project informed funding of pilot interventions designed to address the identified care challenges.

What does "urgency" mean when prioritizing cancer treatment? Results from a qualitative study with German oncologists and other experts during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Cancer care in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic was affected by resource scarcity and the necessity to prioritize medical measures. This study explores ethical criteria for prioritization and their application in cancer practices from the perspective of German oncologists and other experts. METHODS: We conducted fourteen semi-structured interviews with German oncologists between February and July 2021 and fed findings of interviews and additional data on prioritizing cancer care into four structured group discussions, in January and February 2022, with 22 experts from medicine, nursing, law, ethics, health services research and health insurance. Interviews and group discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Narratives of the participants focus on "urgency" as most acceptable criterion for prioritization in cancer care. Patients who are considered curable and those with a high level of suffering, were given a high degree of "urgency." However, further analysis indicates that the "urgency" criterion needs to be further distinguished according to at least three different dimensions: "urgency" to (1) prevent imminent harm to life, (2) prevent future harm to life and (3) alleviate suffering. In addition, "urgency" is modulated by the "success," which can be reached by means of an intervention, and the "likelihood" of reaching that success. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that while "urgency" is a well-established criterion, its operationalization in the context of oncology is challenging. We argue that combined conceptual and clinical analyses are necessary for a sound application of the "urgency" criterion to prioritization in cancer care.

Designing an evidence-informed package of essential health services for Universal Health Coverage: lessons learnt and challenges to implementation in Liberia.

Liberia developed an evidence-informed package of health services for Universal Health Coverage (UHC) based on the Disease Control Priorities 3 evidence. This paper describes the policy decisions, methods and processes adopted for prioritisation, key features of the package and lessons learnt, with special emphasis on feasibility of implementation. Package design was led by the Ministry of Health. Prioritisation of essential services was based on evidence on disease burden, cost-effectiveness, financial risk, equity, budget impact, and feasibility of implementation. Fiscal space analysis was used to assess package affordability and options for expanding the budget envelope. The final adopted package focuses on primary healthcare and comprises a core subpackage of 78 publicly financed interventions and a complementary subpackage of 50 interventions funded through cost-sharing. The estimated per capita cost to the government is US$12.28, averting around 1.2 million DALYs. Key lessons learnt are described: (1) priority setting is essential for designing affordable packages of essential services; (2) the most realistic and affordable option when domestic resources are critically limited is to focus on basic, high-impact primary health services; (3) Liberia and many other countries will continue to rely on donor funding to expand the range of essential services until more domestic resources become available; (4) national leadership and effective engagement of key stakeholders are critical for a successful package design; (5) effective implementation is less likely unless the package cost is affordable and the health system gaps are assessed and addressed. A framework of action was employed to assess the consistency with the prerequisites for an appropriate package design. Based on the framework, Liberia developed a transparent and affordable package for UHC, but the challenges to implementation require further action by the government.

Identifying research gaps and priorities for African family medicine and primary health care.

No abstract available.

The value of health service-based research to health service organisations: a qualitative study with senior health service executives.

BACKGROUND: Research evidence has demonstrably improved health care practices and patient outcomes. However, systemic translation of evidence into practice is far from optimal. The reasons are complex, but often because research is not well aligned with health service priorities. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perspectives of senior health service executives on two issues: (1) the alignment between local research activity and the needs and priorities of their health services, and (2) the extent to which research is or can be integrated as part of usual health care practice. METHODS: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior health leaders from four large health service organisations that are members of Sydney Health Partners (SHP), one of Australia's nationally accredited research translation centres committed to accelerating the translation of research findings into evidence-based health care. The interviews were conducted between November 2022 and January 2023, and were either audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim or recorded in the interviewer field notes. A thematic analysis of the interview data was conducted by two researchers, using the framework method to identify common themes. RESULTS: Seventeen health executives were interviewed, including chief executives, directors of medical services, nursing, allied health, research, and others in executive leadership roles. Responses to issue (1) included themes on re-balancing curiosity- and priority-driven research; providing more support for research activity within health organisations; and helping health professionals and researchers discuss researchable priorities. Responses to issue (2) included identification of elements considered essential for embedding research in health care; and the need to break down silos between research and health care, as well as within health organisations. CONCLUSIONS: Health service leaders value research but want more research that aligns with their needs and priorities. Discussions with researchers about those priorities may need some facilitation. Making research a more integrated part of health care will require strong and broad executive leadership, resources and infrastructure, and investing in capacity- and capability-building across health clinicians, managers and executive staff.

Health care prioritization process for the elderly in rural Tanzania under decentralized system: Prospects and challenges.

INTRODUCTION: Beginning the early 1990s, many countries globally adopted the third-generation health sector reforms with a focus of strengthening the primary health care system through community participation. On the contrary, three decades later, primary health care systems in many Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMICs) including Tanzania have remained weak. Specifically, priority setting for the vulnerable groups including the elderly have been weak. We aimed to analyse the prospects and challenges of the priority setting process for the elderly health care services following the 1990s health sector reforms in Tanzania. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory case study on priority setting process for the elderly healthcare services in Igunga and Nzega Tanzania. We carried out 24 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with the positions of District medical officers, social welfare, Medical Officers in-charge (MOI), planning officers and health system information focal person. Additionally, we carried out two focus group discussions (FGDs), one from each district with six participants from each group. Participants for the FGDs were MOI, health secretary, representative members of Health Facility Governing Committee (HFGC) and Council Health Management Team (CHMT). Data were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Two categories emerged from the analysis of the transcripts. These were the prospects and challenges in priority setting for the elderly population under the decentralized health sector in rural Tanzania. The prospects included; the capacity of the LGAs on priority setting; existence of strategies used by LGAs; availability of teamwork spirit and the existence of guidelines for priority setting at LGAs. The challenges included difficulties of elderly identification, insufficient resources to implement the planned activities at the LGAs, unintegrated digitalized government health information tools or programs at the LGAs, interference of LGAs by the Central Government and low interest of stakeholders on elderly health care. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the prospects and challenges facing priority setting for elderly care at the centralized health system in rural Tanzania. From the results the process is well organized but faces some challenges which if not addressed jeopardized and has potential to continue affecting the priority setting. Addressing the challenges highlighted requires joint efforts from both the elderly population in the community, healthcare providers and decision makers across all levels of the health system. This study serves as an eye-opener and calls for a bigger study to get a comprehensive picture of priority setting of the elderly health care in Tanzania.

Parallel multi-criteria decision analysis for sub-national prioritization of zoonoses and animal diseases in Africa: The case of Cameroon.

The use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for disease prioritization at the sub-national level in sub-Sahara Africa (SSA) is rare. In this research, we contextualized MCDA for parallel prioritization of endemic zoonoses and animal diseases in The Adamawa and North regions of Cameroon. MCDA was associated to categorical principal component analysis (CATPCA), and two-step cluster analysis. Six and seven domains made of 17 and 19 criteria (out of 70) respectively were selected by CATPCA for the prioritization of zoonoses and animal diseases, respectively. The most influencing domains were "public health" for zoonoses and "control and prevention" for animal diseases. Twenty-seven zoonoses and 40 animal diseases were ranked and grouped in three clusters. Sensitivity analysis resulted in high correlation between complete models and reduced models showing the robustness of the simplification processes. The tool used in this study can be applied to prioritize endemic zoonoses and transboundary animal diseases in SSA at the sub-national level and upscaled at the national and regional levels. The relevance of MCDA is high because of its contextualization process and participatory nature enabling better operationalization of disease prioritization outcomes in the context of African countries or other low and middle-income countries.

Translating lessons to reinforce national stillbirth response; multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding priorities and opportunities to deliver quality evidence-based interventions within a limited-resource context in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: There is noted increase in attention towards implementation of evidence-based interventions in response to the stillbirth burden in low- and middle-income countries including Uganda. Recent results reporting some of the strategies adopted have tended to focus much attention towards their overall effect on the stillbirth burden. More is needed regarding stakeholder reflections on priorities and opportunities for delivering quality services within a limited resource setting like Uganda. This paper bridges this knowledge gap. METHODS: Data collection occurred between March and June 2019 at the national level. Qualitative interviews were analysed using a thematic analysis technique. RESULTS: Identified priorities included; a focus on supportive functions such as the referral system, attention to the demand side component of maternal health services, and improvements in the support supervision particularly focusing on empowering subnational level actors. The need to strengthen the learning for better implementation of strategies which are compatible with context was also reported. A comprehensive and favourable policy environment with the potential to direct implementation of strategies, harnessing the private sector contribution as well as the role of national level champions and patient advocates to amplify national stillbirth reduction efforts for continued visibility and impact were recommended. CONCLUSION: Great potential exists within the current strategies to address the national stillbirth burden. However, priorities such as improving the supportive functions of MCH service delivery and attention to the demand side need to be pursued more for better service delivery with opportunities including a favourable policy environment primed to better serve the current strategies. This calls for dedicated efforts targeted at addressing gaps within the existing priorities and opportunities for better delivery of national strategies to address the stillbirth burden in Uganda.

Supporting Ontario public health units to address adverse childhood experiences in pandemic recovery planning: A priority-setting exercise.

BACKGROUND: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are potentially traumatic exposures experienced during childhood, for example, neglect. There is growing evidence that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and related socioeconomic conditions contributed to an increased risk of ACEs. As public health programs/services are re-evaluated and restored following the state of emergency, it is important to plan using an ACEs-informed lens. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize initiatives or activities that Public Health Ontario (PHO) could undertake to support Ontario public health units' work towards ACEs-informed pandemic recovery plans. METHODS: The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method was adapted to conduct a priority-setting exercise (May-October 2022). Two online surveys were administered with members of the Healthy Growth and Development (HGD) Evidence Network, comprised of public health unit staff working in child and family health/HGD from Ontario's 34 public health units. In the first survey, participants were asked to propose activities or initiatives that PHO could undertake to support Ontario public health units' work towards ACEs-informed planning. In the second survey, participants were asked to score the final list of options against pre-determined prioritization criteria (for example, relevance). Responses were numerically coded and used to calculate prioritization scores, which were used to rank the options. RESULTS: In all, 76% of public health units (n = 26) responded to the first survey to identify options. The 168 proposed ideas were consolidated into a final list of 13 options, which fall under PHO's scientific and technical support mandate areas (data and surveillance, evidence synthesis, collaboration and networking, knowledge exchange and research). A total of 79% of public health units (n = 27) responded to the follow-up survey to prioritize options. Prioritization scores ranged from 76.4% to 88.6%. The top-ranked option was the establishment of a new provincial ACEs community of practice. CONCLUSIONS: Over three quarters of public health units contributed to identifying and ranking 13 options for PHO to support public health units in considering and addressing ACEs through pandemic recovery planning. In consultation with the ACEs and Resilience Community of Practice, recently formed on the basis of this exercise, PHO will continue to use the ranked list of options to inform work-planning activities/priorities.

Overarching Priorities for Health and Care Research in the United Kingdom: A Coproduced Synthesis of James Lind Alliance 'Top 10s'.

INTRODUCTION: James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) produce 'Top 10' lists of health and care research priorities through a structured, shared decision-making process with patients or service users, carers and health or care professionals who identify questions that are most important to them. To date, over 150 PSPs in different areas of health and care have published research priorities. Some PSPs share similar priorities, which could be combined, promoted and addressed through collaborative research to increase value and reduce research waste. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify overarching themes common to JLA PSP priorities across different areas of health and care. METHODS: Our analysis included 'Top 10' research priorities produced by UK-based JLA PSPs between 2016 and 2020. The priorities were coded deductively by the Health Research Classification System (HRCS) health category and research activity. We then carried out online workshops with patients, service users and carers to generate new codes not already captured by this framework. Within each code, multistakeholder inductive thematic analysis was used to identify overarching themes, defined as encompassing priorities from three or more PSPs covering two or more health categories. We used codesign methods to produce an interactive tool for end users to navigate the overarching themes. RESULTS: Five hundred and fifteen research priorities from 51 PSPs were included in our analysis. The priorities together encompassed 20 of 21 HRCS health categories, the most common being 'generic health relevance' (22%), 'mental health' (18%) and 'musculoskeletal' (14%). We identified 89 overarching themes and subthemes, which we organised into a hierarchy with seven top-level themes: quality of life, caregivers and families, causes and prevention, screening and diagnosis, treatment and management, services and systems and social influences and impacts. CONCLUSION: There are many overarching themes common to research priorities across multiple areas of health and care. To facilitate new research and research funding, we have developed an interactive tool to help researchers, funders and patients or service users to explore these priority topics. This is freely available to download online. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients or service users and carers were involved throughout the study, including deciding the aims, designing the study, analysing priorities to identify themes, interpreting and reporting the findings.

Community-dwelling older adults' perspectives on health risks: a qualitative study exploring anxieties, priorities, and expectations in ageing.

BACKGROUND: With the conflict between the promise of ageing in health and longevity and the limited availability of health resources and social support, older adults in China inevitably experience anxieties surrounding health risks. This study aims to investigate how older adults perceive the health risks that come with getting older, explore the degree to which health risks affect older adults, and advocate for active engagement in practices for managing health risks. METHODS: Using purposive sampling, three districts of Beijing (Xicheng District, Fengtai District, and Daxing District, respectively) were selected for the research. Qualitative semi-structured and in-depth interviews were conducted with 70 community-dwelling older adults who participated in the study. Data were extracted and analyzed based on a thematic framework approach. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (i) the anxieties of older adults concerning health risks in ageing; (ii) the priorities of older adults for health risk management in ageing; (iii) the expectations of older adults for health risk management in ageing. The primary health concerns among older adults included disease incidence and function decline. It was found that basic health management emerged as a critical need for older adults to mitigate health risks. Moreover, it was observed that healthcare support for older adults from familial, institutional, and governmental levels exhibited varying degrees of inadequacy. CONCLUSIONS: The primary source of anxieties among older adults regarding health risks predominantly stems from a perceived sense of health deprivation. It is often compounded by persistent barriers to primary care of priorities in managing health risks among older adults. In addition, the expectations of older adults for health risk management emphasize the necessity for integrated care approaches. Therefore, further research should give priority to the prevention and management of health risks, aim to reduce anxieties, provide integrated care to meet the primary needs and expectations of older adults, and ultimately strive toward the overarching goal of promoting health and longevity.

Selecting the right treatment: Health outcome priorities in older patients with bladder cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Selecting the appropriate treatment for older patients with non-muscle invasive (NMIBC) or muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is challenging due to smoking-related comorbidities, treatment toxicity, and an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. Considering patient preferences prior to treatment is therefore crucial. Here, we aimed to identify the health outcome priorities of older patients with high-risk NMIBC (HR-NMIBC) or MIBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 70 years or older or at risk for frailty, diagnosed with HR-NMIBC or MIBC without distant metastases, were referred for a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). The CGA consisted of an interview, physical examination, and several tests to examine physical, cognitive, functional, and social status. Quality of life was assessed using EQ5D and EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires. Health outcome priorities were discussed using the Outcome Prioritization Tool (OPT) and associations between health outcome priorities and CGA-determinants and quality of life were studied. RESULTS: Of 146 patients (14 HR-NMIBC, 132 MIBC), OPT data was available for 139. Life extension was most often prioritized (44%), closely followed by preserving independence (40%). Reducing pain (7%) and other symptoms (9%) were less often prioritized. Patients prioritizing life extension had fewer musculoskeletal problems than patients prioritizing reducing pain or other symptoms (p = 0.02). Patients at risk of or suffering from malnutrition more frequently selected reducing pain or other symptoms as their health outcome priority (p = 0.004). For all other CGA-determinants and quality of life, there were no significant differences between groups based on health outcome priorities. DISCUSSION: In older patients with HR-NMIBC and MIBC, life extension and preserving independence are the most common health outcomes priorities. CGA-determinants and quality of life are generally not associated with the prioritization of health outcomes. As health outcome priorities cannot be predicted by CGA-determinants or quality of life, it is crucial to discuss health outcome priorities with patients to promote shared decision-making.