Early childhood development coming of age: science through the life course.

Early childhood development programmes vary in coordination and quality, with inadequate and inequitable access, especially for children younger than 3 years. New estimates, based on proxy measures of stunting and poverty, indicate that 250 million children (43%) younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries are at risk of not reaching their developmental potential. There is therefore an urgent need to increase multisectoral coverage of quality programming that incorporates health, nutrition, security and safety, responsive caregiving, and early learning. Equitable early childhood policies and programmes are crucial for meeting Sustainable Development Goals, and for children to develop the intellectual skills, creativity, and wellbeing required to become healthy and productive adults. In this paper, the first in a three part Series on early childhood development, we examine recent scientific progress and global commitments to early childhood development. Research, programmes, and policies have advanced substantially since 2000, with new neuroscientific evidence linking early adversity and nurturing care with brain development and function throughout the life course.

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.

Individual interactions in a multi-country implementation-focused quality of care network for maternal, newborn and child health: A social network analysis.

The Network for Improving Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (QCN) was established to build a cross-country platform for joint-learning around quality improvement implementation approaches to reduce mortality. This paper describes and explores the structure of the QCN in four countries and at global level. Using Social Network Analysis (SNA), this cross-sectional study maps the QCN networks at global level and in four countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi and Uganda) and assesses the interactions among actors involved. A pre-tested closed-ended structured questionnaire was completed by 303 key actors in early 2022 following purposeful and snowballing sampling. Data were entered into an online survey tool, and exported into Microsoft Excel for data management and analysis. This study received ethical approval as part of a broader evaluation. The SNA identified 566 actors across the four countries and at global level. Bangladesh, Malawi and Uganda had multiple-hub networks signifying multiple clusters of actors reflecting facility or district networks, whereas the network in Ethiopia and at global level had more centralized networks. There were some common features across the country networks, such as low overall density of the network, engagement of actors at all levels of the system, membership of related committees identified as the primary role of actors, and interactions spanning all types (learning, action and information sharing). The most connected actors were facility level actors in all countries except Ethiopia, which had mostly national level actors. The results reveal the uniqueness and complexity of each network assessed in the evaluation. They also affirm the broader qualitative evaluation assessing the nature of these networks, including composition and leadership. Gaps in communication between members of the network and limited interactions of actors between countries and with global level actors signal opportunities to strengthen QCN.

Understanding factors impacting global priority of emergency care: a qualitative policy analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The high burden of emergency medical conditions has not been met with adequate financial and political prioritisation especially in low and middle-income countries. We examined the factors that have shaped the priority of global emergency care and highlight potential responses by emergency care advocates. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with key experts in global emergency care practice, public health, health policy and advocacy. We then applied a policy framework based on political ethnography and content analysis to code for underlying themes. RESULTS: We identified problem definition, coalition building, paucity of data and positioning, as the main challenges faced by emergency care advocates. Problem definition remains the key issue, with divergent ideas on what emergency care is, should be and what solutions are to be prioritised. Proponents have struggled to portray the urgency of the issue in a way that commands action from decision-makers. The lack of data further limits their effectiveness. However, there is much reason for optimism given the network's commitment to the issue, the emerging leadership and the existence of policy windows. CONCLUSION: To improve global priority for emergency care, proponents should take advantage of the emerging governance structure and build consensus on definitions, generate data-driven solutions, find strategic framings and engage with non-traditional allies.