How to do (or not to do) how to embed equity in the conduct of health research: lessons from piloting the 8Quity tool.

Global health research reflects and can either perpetuate or challenge the complex power hierarchies and inequities that characterize our health systems and the societies in which they are situated. The imperative to embed equity in health research aligns with broader efforts globally to promote equitable partnerships among researchers, and between researchers and the communities potentially impacted by their research, or with whom knowledge is co-produced. We describe lessons learnt from piloting a heuristic and diagnostic tool for researchers to assess integration of equity considerations into their research practices. The '8Quity' tool comprises eight domains of equity we developed which roughly correspond to the typical stages in the research process-from team formation to capacity strengthening, research ethics and governance to relationships with research partners, participants and stakeholders beyond the project period. Resources that detail how this can be done on a practical level are also shared, corresponding to each of the eight domains. We acknowledge that tools like 8Quity may be helpful, even necessary, but are insufficient for the broader societal changes required to ensure equity in the research enterprise. However, by firmly setting intentions and accountabilities within our research practices, we (as researchers) can play a role, however modest, in turning the tide of the injustices that leave some communities behind.

Tools to assess quality of life in adults with chronic conditions in India: A scoping review.

Background: Chronic diseases are a major contributor to mortality, morbidity, and socio-economic costs globally, including in India. Quality of life (QoL) is an important patient-centered outcome for chronic disease. Measurement properties of tools for assessing QOL in the Indian context have not been assessed systematically. Methods: A scoping review was conducted, and four major electronic databases were searched. Screening was conducted by at least two independent reviewers, with a third person acting as an arbiter. Data from the retrieved full texts were extracted by one reviewer, with a sample verified by another reviewer to reduce any data extraction errors. A narrative synthesis was done with a focus on measurement properties of tools, including but not limited to internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, validity, and acceptability. Results: Out of 6706 records retrieved, a total of 37 studies describing 34 tools (both generic and disease-specific tools) for 16 chronic conditions were included. Most of the studies were cross-sectional (n = 23). Overall, most tools had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha value ≥0.70) and good-to-excellent test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.75-0.9), but there was variability in acceptability. In terms of acceptability, seven tools were positively assessed (meeting psychometric property requirements), but all except the World Health Organization QoL tool were disease specific. Many tools have also been tested for local context, and many translated and tested in one or few languages only, thus limiting their usability across the nation. Women were underrepresented in many studies, and tools were not evaluated in other genders. Generalizability to tribal people is also limited. Conclusion: The scoping review provides a summary of all QOL assessment tools for people with chronic diseases in India. It supports future researchers to make informed decisions for choosing tools. The study highlights the need for more research to develop QOL tools which are contextually applicable and enables the comparability across diseases, people, and regions within India and potentially in the South Asian region.

Community health workers for pandemic response: a rapid evidence synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), affects 213 countries or territories globally. We received a request from National Health Systems Resource Centre, a public agency in India, to conduct rapid evidence synthesis (RES) on community health workers (CHWs) for COVID-19 prevention and control in 3 days. METHODS: We searched PubMed, websites of ministries (n=3), public agencies (n=6), multilateral institutions (n=3), COVID-19 resource aggregators (n=5) and preprints (n=1) (without language restrictions) for articles on CHWs in pandemics. Two reviewers screened the records independently with a third reviewer resolving disagreements. One reviewer extracted data with another reviewer cross-checking it. A framework on CHW performance in primary healthcare not specific to pandemic was used to guide data extraction and narrative analysis. RESULTS: We retrieved 211 records and finally included 36 articles. Most of the evidence was from low-and middle-income countries with well-established CHW programmes. Evidence from CHW programmes initiated during pandemics and for CHW involvement in pandemic response in high-income countries was scant. CHW roles and tasks change substantially during pandemics. Clear guidance, training for changed roles and definition of what constitutes essential activities (ie, those that must to be sustained) is required. Most common additional activities during pandemics were community awareness, engagement and sensitisation (including for countering stigma) and contact tracing. CHWs were reported to be involved in all aspects of contact tracing - this was reported to affect routine service delivery. CHWs have often been stigmatised or been socially ostracised during pandemics. Providing PPE, housing allowance, equal training opportunities, transportation allowance, improving salaries (paid on time and for a broad range of services) and awards in high-profile public events contributed to better recruitment and retention. We also created inventories of resources with guiding notes on guidelines for health workers (n=24), self-isolation in the community (n=10) and information, education and counselling materials on COVID-19 (n=16). CONCLUSIONS: CHWs play a critical role in pandemics. It is important to ensure role clarity, training, supportive supervision, as well as their work satisfaction, health and well-being. More implementation research on CHWs in pandemics is required.