Framing rehabilitation through health policy and systems research: priorities for strengthening rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Recent estimates report that 2.4 billion people with health conditions globally could benefit from rehabilitation. While the benefits of rehabilitation for individuals and society have been described in the literature, many individuals, especially in low- and middle-income countries do not have access to quality rehabilitation. As the need for rehabilitation continues to increase, it is crucial that health systems are adequately prepared to meet this need. Practice- and policy-relevant evidence plays an important role in health systems strengthening efforts. The aim of this paper is to report on the outcome of a global consultative process to advance the development of a research framework to stimulate health policy and systems research (HPSR) for rehabilitation, in order to generate evidence needed by key stakeholders. METHODS: A multi-stakeholder participatory technical consultation was convened by WHO to develop a research framework. This meeting included participants from selected Member States, rehabilitation experts, HPSR experts, public health researchers, civil society and other stakeholders from around the world. The meeting focused on introducing systems approaches to stakeholders and deliberating on priority rehabilitation issues in health systems. Participants were allocated to one of four multi-stakeholder groups with a facilitator to guide the structured technical consultations. Qualitative data in the form of written responses to guiding questions were collected during the structured technical consultations. A technical working group was then established to analyse the data and extract its emerging themes. This informed the development of the HPSR framework for rehabilitation and a selection of preliminary research questions that exemplify how the framework might be used. RESULTS: A total of 123 individuals participated in the multi-stakeholder technical consultations. The elaborated framework is informed by an ecological model and puts forth elements of the six WHO traditional building blocks of the health system, while emphasizing additional components pertinent to rehabilitation, such as political priority, engagement and participatory approaches, and considerations regarding demand and access. Importantly, the framework highlights the multilevel interactions needed across health systems in order to strengthen rehabilitation. Additionally, an initial set of research questions was proposed as a primer for how the framework might be used. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthening health systems to meet the increasing need for rehabilitation will require undertaking more HPSR to inform the integration of rehabilitation into health systems globally. We anticipate that the proposed framework and the emerging research questions will support countries in their quest to increase access to rehabilitation for their populations.

Postings and transfers in the Ghanaian health system: a study of health workforce governance.

BACKGROUND: Decision-making on postings and transfers - that is, the geographic deployment of the health workforce - is a key element of health workforce governance. When poorly managed, postings and transfers result in maldistribution, absenteeism, and low morale. At stake is managing the balance between organisational (i.e., health system) and individual (i.e., staff preference) needs. The negotiation of this potential convergence or divergence of interests provides a window on practices of postings and transfers, and on the micro-practices of governance in health systems more generally. This article explores the policies and processes, and the interplay between formal and informal rules and norms which underpin postings and transfers practice in two rural districts in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight district managers and 87 frontline staff from the district health administration, district hospital, polyclinic, health centres and community outreach compounds across two districts. Interviews sought to understand how the postings and transfers process works in practice, factors in frontline staff and district manager decision-making, personal experiences in being posted, and study leave as a common strategy for obtaining transfers. RESULTS: Differential negotiation-spaces at regional and district level exist and inform postings and transfers in practice. This is in contrast to the formal cascaded rules set to govern decision-making authority for postings and transfers. Many frontline staff lack policy clarity of postings and transfers processes and thus 'test' the system through informal staff lobbying, compounding staff perception of the postings and transfers process as being unfair. District managers are also challenged with limited decision-space embedded in broader policy contexts of systemic hierarchy and resource dependence. This underscores the negotiation process as ongoing, rather than static. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point to tensions between individual and organisational goals. This article contributes to a burgeoning literature on postings and transfers as a distinct dynamic which bridges the interactions between health systems governance and health workforce development. Importantly, this article helps to expand the notion of health systems governance beyond 'good' governance towards understanding governance as a process of negotiation.

Understanding the state of health policy and systems research in West Africa and capacity strengthening needs: scoping of peer-reviewed publications trends and patterns 1990-2015.

BACKGROUND: The need for locally-driven, locally-generated evidence to guide health policy and systems decision-making and implementation in West Africa remains urgent. Thus, health policy and systems research (HPSR) is a field with great potential for addressing many of the sub-region's intransigent health challenges. This paper presents an analysis of trends and patterns of peer-reviewed HPSR publications across the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), to help understand trends and patterns of HPSR publication and the degree of involvement of West African researchers in HPSR evidence generation in the sub-region. Our goal was to use the findings to inform the development of a sub-regional strategy to strengthen HPSR and its use to inform development and improvement of health outcomes. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted over a 25-year period from January 1990 to September 2015. Literature searches were conducted in English and French using Google Scholar, PubMed Central and Cairn.info. RESULTS: A total of 258 articles were retrieved. Of these, 246 were statistically analysed, with 54% having West African lead authors. Two thirds of the papers originated from three out of the 15 countries of the ECOWAS, specifically Nigeria (28.86%), Burkina Faso (21.54%) and Ghana (17.07%). Most authors were based in academic institutions and participation of authors from ministries of health, hospitals and non-governmental organisations was limited. English was the predominant language for publication even for papers originating from Francophone West African countries. There has been a progressive increase in publications over the studied period. CONCLUSION: Despite progressive improvements over time, West Africa remains a weak sub-region in terms of peer-reviewed HPSR publications. Within the overall weakness, there is country-to-country variation. The fact that only a handful of countries accounted for nearly 70% of the total volume of publications in West Africa attests to the great disparities in individual, institutional and contextual capacities for HPSR evidence generation. Bridging the gap between lead institutions (universities and research centres) and the practice community (ministries, hospitals, non-governmental organisations) is indispensable for ensuring the practical use of HPSR evidence. There remains a major need for investments in HPSR capacity building in West Africa.

Spanning maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) and health systems research boundaries: conducive and limiting health systems factors to improving MNCH outcomes in West Africa.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements over time, West Africa lags behind global as well as sub-Saharan averages in its maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) outcomes. This is despite the availability of an increasing body of knowledge on interventions that improve such outcomes. Beyond our knowledge of what interventions work, insights are needed on others factors that facilitate or inhibit MNCH outcome improvement. This study aimed to explore health system factors conducive or limiting to MNCH policy and programme implementation and outcomes in West Africa, and how and why they work in context. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods multi-country case study focusing predominantly, but not exclusively, on the six West African countries (Burkina Faso, Benin, Mali, Senegal, Nigeria and Ghana) of the Innovating for Maternal and Child Health in Africa initiative. Data collection involved non-exhaustive review of grey and published literature, and 48 key informant interviews. We validated our findings and conclusions at two separate multi-stakeholder meetings organised by the West African Health Organization. To guide our data collection and analysis, we developed a unique theoretical framework of the link between health systems and MNCH, in which we conceptualised health systems as the foundations, pillars and roofing of a shelter for MNCH, and context as the ground on which the foundation is laid. RESULTS: A multitude of MNCH policies and interventions were being piloted, researched or implemented at scale in the sub-region, most of which faced multiple interacting conducive and limiting health system factors to effective implementation, as well as contextual challenges. Context acted through its effect on health system factors as well as on the social determinants of health. CONCLUSIONS: To accelerate and sustain improvements in MNCH outcomes in West Africa, an integrated approach to research and practice of simultaneously addressing health systems and contextual factors alongside MNCH service delivery interventions is needed. This requires multi-level, multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder engagement approaches that span current geographical, language, research and practice community boundaries in West Africa, and effectively link the efforts of actors interested in health systems strengthening with those of actors interested in MNCH outcome improvement.

Improved harmonisation from policy dialogue? Realist perspectives from Guinea and Chad.

BACKGROUND: Harmonisation is a key principle of the Paris Declaration. The Universal Health Coverage (UHC) Partnership, an initiative of the European Union, the Government of Luxembourg and the World Health Organization, supported health policy dialogues between 2012 and 2015 in identified countries in the WHO African Region. The UHC Partnership has amongst its key objectives to strengthen national health policy development. In Guinea and Chad, policy dialogue focused on elaborating the national health plan and other key documents. This study is an analytical reflection inspired by realist evaluative approaches to understand whether policy dialogue led to improved harmonisation amongst health actors in Guinea and Chad, and if so, how and why. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in Guinea and Chad with key informants at the national and sub-national government levels, civil society, and development partners. A review of relevant policy documents and reports was added to data collection to construct a full picture of the policy dialogue process. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations were used as the realist framework to guide the analysis on how participants' understanding of what policy dialogue was and the way the policy dialogue process unfolded led to improved harmonisation. RESULTS: Improved harmonisation as a result of policy dialogue was perceived to be stronger in Guinea than in Chad. While in both countries the participants held a shared view of what policy dialogue was and what it could achieve, and both policy dialogue processes were considered to be well implemented (i.e., well-facilitated, evidence-based, participatory, and consisted of recurring meetings and activities), certain contextual factors in Chad tempered the view of harmonisation as having improved. These were the pre-existence of dialogic policy processes that had exposed the actors to the potential that policy dialogue could have; a focus on elaborating provincial level strategies, which gave the sense that the process was more bottom-up; and the perception that there were acute resource constraints, which conditioned partners' interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Policy dialogue improves harmonisation in terms of fostering information exchange amongst partners; however, it does not appear to influence the operational procedures of the actors. This has implications for aid effectiveness.

Policy dialogue to improve health outcomes in low income countries: what are the issues and way forward?

BACKGROUND: This paper has three objectives: to review the health development landscape in the World Health Organization African Region, to discuss the role of health policy dialogue in improving harmonisation and alignment to national health policies and strategic plans, and to provide an analytical view of the critical factors in realising a good outcome from a health policy dialogue process. DISCUSSION: Strengthening policy dialogue to support the development and implementation of robust and comprehensive national health policies and plans, as well as to improve aid effectiveness, is seen as a strategic entry point to improving health sector results. However, unbalanced power relations, the lack of contextualised and relevant evidence, the diverse interests of the actors involved, and the lack of conceptual clarity on what policy dialogue entails impact the outcomes of a policy dialogue process. The critical factors for a successful policy dialogue have been identified as adequate preparation; secured time and resources to facilitate an open, inclusive and informed discussion among the stakeholders; and stakeholders' monitoring and assessment of the dialogue's activities for continued learning. Peculiarities of low income countries pose a challenge to their policy dialogue processes, including the chaotic-policy making processes, the varied capacity of the actors and donor dependence. CONCLUSION: Policy dialogue needs to be appreciated as a complex and iterative process that spans the whole process of policy-making, implementation, review and monitoring, and subsequent policy revisions. The existence of the critical factors for a successful policy dialogue process needs to be ensured whilst paying special attention to the peculiarities of low income countries and potential power relations, and mitigating the possible negative consequences. There is need to be cognisant of the varied capacities and interests of stakeholders and the need for capacity building, and to put in place mechanisms to manage conflict of interest. The likelihood of a favourable outcome from a policy dialogue process will depend on the characteristics of the issue under consideration and whether it is contested or not, and the policy dialogue process needs to be tailored accordingly.

Perspectives on health policy dialogue: definition, perceived importance and coordination.

BACKGROUND: Countries in the World Health Organization African Region have witnessed an increase in global health initiatives in the recent past. Although these have provided opportunities for expanding coverage of health interventions; their poor alignment with the countries' priorities and weak coordination, are among the challenges that have affected their impact. A well-coordinated health policy dialogue provides an opportunity to address these challenges, but calls for common understanding among stakeholders of what policy dialogue entails. This paper seeks to assess stakeholders' understanding and perceived importance of health policy dialogue and of policy dialogue coordination. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study using qualitative methods. Interviews were conducted with 90 key informants from the national and sub-national levels in Lusophone Cabo Verde, Francophone Chad, Guinea and Togo, and Anglophone Liberia using an open-ended interview guide. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and then put through inductive thematic content analysis using QRS software Version 10. RESULTS: There were variations in the definition of policy dialogue that were not necessarily linked to the linguistic leaning of respondents' countries or whether the dialogue took place at the national or sub-national level. The definitions were grouped into five categories based on whether they had an outcome, operational, process, forum or platform, or interactive and evidence-sharing orientation. The stakeholders highlighted multiple benefits of policy dialogue including ensuring stakeholder participation, improving stakeholder harmonisation and alignment, supporting implementation of health policies, fostering continued institutional learning, providing a guiding framework and facilitating stakeholder analysis. CONCLUSION: Policy dialogue offers the opportunity to improve stakeholder participation in policy development and promote aid effectiveness. However, conceptual clarity is needed to ensure pursuance of common objectives. While it is clear that stakeholder involvement is an important component of policy dialogue, numbers must be manageable for meaningful dialogue. Ownership and coordination of the policy dialogue are important aspects of the process, and building the institutional capacity of the ministry of health requires a comprehensive approach as opposed to strengthening selected departments within it. Likewise, capacity for policy dialogue needs to be built at the sub-national level, alongside improving the bottom-up approach in policy processes.

Harmonisation and standardisation of health sector and programme reviews and evaluations - how can they better inform health policy dialogue?

BACKGROUND: Health sector and programme performance assessments provide a rich source of contextual data directly linked to implementation of programmes and can inform health policy dialogue, planning and resource allocation. In seeking to maximise this opportunity, there are challenges to overcome. A meeting convened by the World Health Organization African Region discussed the strengths, weaknesses and challenges to harmonising and standardising health sector and programme performance assessments, as well as use of evidence from such processes in decision making. This article synthesises the deliberations which emerged from the meeting. Discussing these in light of other literature we propose practical options to standardising health sector and programme performance assessment and improve realisation of using evidence in decision making. DISCUSSION: Use of evidence generated from health sector and programme performance assessments into regular country processes of sectoral monitoring, dialogue and policy modification is crucial. However, this process faces several challenges. Identified challenges were categorised under several themes, namely the weak institutional capacities for monitoring and evaluation in reference to weak health information systems, a lack of tools and skills, and weak accountability mechanisms; desynchronised planning timeframes between programme and overall health sector strategies; inadequate time to undertake comprehensive and good quality performance assessment; weak mechanisms for following up on implementation of recommendations; lack of effective stakeholder participation; and divergent political aspirations. CONCLUSION: The question of what performance assessment is for in a country must be asked and answered clearly if the utility of these processes is to be realised. Standardising programme and sector reviews offers numerable opportunities that need to be maximised. Identified challenges need to be overcome through strengthened Ministry of Health leadership, effective stakeholder engagement and institutionalising follow-up mechanisms for agreed recommendations. In addition, health sector performance assessments need to be institutionalised as part of the accountability mechanism, and they must be planned for and funding secured within annual budget and medium term expenditure frameworks.

Advancing the application of systems thinking in health: realist evaluation of the Leadership Development Programme for district manager decision-making in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Although there is widespread agreement that strong district manager decision-making improves health systems, understanding about how the design and implementation of capacity-strengthening interventions work is limited. The Ghana Health Service has adopted the Leadership Development Programme (LDP) as one intervention to support the development of management and leadership within district teams. This paper seeks to address how and why the LDP 'works' when it is introduced into a district health system in Ghana, and whether or not it supports systems thinking in district teams. METHODS: We undertook a realist evaluation to investigate the outcomes, contexts, and mechanisms of the intervention. Building on two working hypotheses developed from our earlier work, we developed an explanatory case study of one rural district in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana. Data collection included participant observation, document review, and semi-structured interviews with district managers prior to, during, and after the intervention. Working backwards from an in-depth analysis of the context and observed short- and medium-term outcomes, we drew a causal loop diagram to explain interactions between contexts, outcomes, and mechanisms. RESULTS: The LDP was a valuable experience for district managers and teams were able to attain short-term outcomes because the novel approach supported teamwork, initiative-building, and improved prioritisation. However, the LDP was not institutionalised in district teams and did not lead to increased systems thinking. This was related to the context of high uncertainty within the district, and hierarchical authority of the system, which triggered the LDP's underlying goal of organisational control. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of organisational context is important when trying to sustain complex interventions, as it seems to influence the gap between short- and medium-term outcomes. More explicit focus on systems thinking principles that enable district managers to better cope with their contexts may strengthen the institutionalisation of the LDP in the future.

Prepared for the polycrisis? The need for complexity science and systems thinking to address global and national evidence gaps.

The Sustainable Development Goals are far off track. The convergence of global threats such as climate change, conflict and the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic-among others-call for better data and research evidence that can account for the complex interactions between these threats. In the time of polycrisis, global and national-level data and research evidence must address complexity. Viewed through the lens of 'systemic risk', there is a need for data and research evidence that is sufficiently representative of the multiple interdependencies of global threats. Instead, current global published literature seems to be dominated by correlational, descriptive studies that are unable to account for complex interactions. The literature is geographically limited and rarely from countries facing severe polycrisis threats. As a result, country guidance fails to treat these threats interdependently. Applied systems thinking can offer more diverse research methods that are able to generate complex evidence. This is achievable through more participatory processes that will assist stakeholders in defining system boundaries and behaviours. Additionally, applied systems thinking can draw on known methods for hypothesising, modelling, visualising and testing complex system properties over time. Application is much needed for generating evidence at the global level and within national-level policy processes and structures.

Making progress in early-career publishing: evolutions of the women's publication mentorship programme.

Mentorship is vital for early-career researchers, especially women from low- and middle-income countries seeking to publish their work. This paper explores the evolution of the Women's Publication Mentorship Programme, a collaborative initiative pioneered by the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, further strengthened through the partnership of Health Systems Global, and Health Policy and Planning. Over a span of five years and encompassing three cohorts, the program supported 45 early-career researchers from 24 countries, resulting in insightful papers on equity-oriented health system topics. Beyond the direct outcomes of strengthening the writing skills of first-time women authors and facilitating paper publications, the Programme has also influenced Health System Global's strategic approach and conceptual framework for systemic capacity strengthening in health policy and systems research. It has also played a pivotal role in addressing the longstanding gender imbalance in global health authorship. Amid these achievements, our program consistently evolved, drawing from lessons of the past cohort. Challenges, such as the need for extended paper development timelines, addressing language barriers, and strengthening methodological rigor in initial manuscripts, were met with solutions. Insights and experiences from previous participants translated into tangible results, notably elevating the quality of journal supplement publications. This commentary explores key lessons from the second cohort's journey and its evolving nature. It also highlights persistent challenges and provides practical recommendations for organizations to enhance their mentorship programs, ultimately fostering the career growth of early-career researchers in health policy and systems research.

Development of the Systems Thinking for Health Actions framework: a literature review and a case study.

BACKGROUND: Systems thinking is an approach that views systems with a holistic lens, focusing on how components of systems are interconnected. Specifically, the application of systems thinking has proven to be beneficial when applied to health systems. Although there is plenty of theory surrounding systems thinking, there is a gap between the theoretical use of systems thinking and its actual application to tackle health challenges. This study aimed to create a framework to expose systems thinking characteristics in the design and implementation of actions to improve health. METHODS: A systematised literature review was conducted and a Taxonomy of Systems Thinking Objectives was adapted to develop the new 'Systems Thinking for Health Actions' (STHA) framework. The applicability of the framework was tested using the COVID-19 response in Pakistan as a case study. RESULTS: The framework identifies six key characteristics of systems thinking: (1) recognising and understanding interconnections and system structure, (2) identifying and understanding feedback, (3) identifying leverage points, (4) understanding dynamic behaviour, (5) using mental models to suggest possible solutions to a problem and (6) creating simulation models to test policies. The STHA framework proved beneficial in identifying systems thinking characteristics in the COVID-19 national health response in Pakistan. CONCLUSION: The proposed framework can provide support for those aiming to applying systems thinking while developing and implementing health actions. We also envision this framework as a retrospective tool that can help assess if systems thinking was applied in health actions.

Applied systems thinking: unlocking theory, evidence and practice for health policy and systems research.

While systems thinking has been generally acknowledged as important to the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR), it remains underutilized. In particular, systems thinking has been perceived as predominantly conceptual, with fewer applications of systems thinking documented. This commentary makes three key points, namely that (1) advances in applied systems thinking in HPSR have been hindered by an imprecision in terminology, conflating '[health] systems approaches' with complex adaptive systems theory; (2) limited examples of applied systems thinking have been highlighted and recognized in research, but have not been fully and equally appreciated in policymaking and practice and (3) explicit use of theory, long-term research-policy collaborations and better documentation of evidence can increase the use and usefulness of applied systems thinking in HPSR. By addressing these matters, the potentials of systems thinking in HPSR can be truly unlocked.

A health systems resilience research agenda: moving from concept to practice.

Health system resilience, known as the ability for health systems to absorb, adapt or transform to maintain essential functions when stressed or shocked, has quickly gained popularity following shocks like COVID-19. The concept is relatively new in health policy and systems research and the existing research remains mostly theoretical. Research to date has viewed resilience as an outcome that can be measured through performance outcomes, as an ability of complex adaptive systems that is derived from dynamic behaviour and interactions, or as both. However, there is little congruence on the theory and the existing frameworks have not been widely used, which as diluted the research applications for health system resilience. A global group of health system researchers were convened in March 2021 to discuss and identify priorities for health system resilience research and implementation based on lessons from COVID-19 and other health emergencies. Five research priority areas were identified: (1) measuring and managing systems dynamic performance, (2) the linkages between societal resilience and health system resilience, (3) the effect of governance on the capacity for resilience, (4) creating legitimacy and (5) the influence of the private sector on health system resilience. A key to filling these research gaps will be longitudinal and comparative case studies that use cocreation and coproduction approaches that go beyond researchers to include policy-makers, practitioners and the public.

Towards universal health coverage: reforming the neglected district health system in Africa.

In most African countries, the district sphere of governance is a colonial creation for harnessing resources from the communities that are located far away from the centre with the assistance of minimally skilled personnel who are subordinate to the central authority with respect to decision-making and initiative. Unfortunately, postcolonial reforms of district governance have retained the hierarchical structure of the local government. Anchored to such a district arrangement, the (district) health system (DHS) is too weak and impoverished to function in spite of enormous knowledge and natural resources for a seamless implementation of universal health coverage (UHC). Sadly, the quick-fix projects of the 1990s with the laudable intention to reduce the burden of disease within a specified time-point dealt the fatal blow on the DHS administration by diminishing it to a stop-post and a warehouse for commodities (such as bednets and vaccines) destined for the communities. We reviewed the situation of the district in sub-Saharan African countries and identified five attributes that are critical for developing a UHC-friendly DHS. In this analytical paper, we discuss decision-making authority, coordination, resource control, development initiative and management skills as critical factors. We highlight the required strategic shifts and recommend a dialogue for charting an African regional course for a reformed DHS for UHC. Further examination of these factors and perhaps other ancillary criteria will be useful for developing a checklist for assessing the suitability of a DHS for the UHC that Africa deserves.

Strategic leadership capacity building for Sub-Saharan African health systems and public health governance: a multi-country assessment of essential competencies and optimal design for a Pan African DrPH.

Leadership capacity needs development and nurturing at all levels for strong health systems governance and improved outcomes. The Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) is a professional, interdisciplinary terminal degree focused on strategic leadership capacity building. The concept is not new and there are several programmes globally-but none within Africa, despite its urgent need for strong strategic leadership in health. To address this gap, a consortium of institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa, UK and North America have embarked on a collaboration to develop and implement a pan-African DrPH with support from the Rockefeller Foundation. This paper presents findings of research to verify relevance, identify competencies and support programme design and customization. A mixed methods cross sectional multi-country study was conducted in Ghana, South Africa and Uganda. Data collection involved a non-exhaustive desk review, 34 key informant (KI) interviews with past and present health sector leaders and a questionnaire with closed and open ended items administered to 271 potential DrPH trainees. Most study participants saw the concept of a pan-African DrPH as relevant and timely. Strategic leadership competencies identified by KI included providing vision and inspiration for the organization, core personal values and character qualities such as integrity and trustworthiness, skills in adapting to situations and context and creating and maintaining effective change and systems. There was consensus that programme design should emphasize learning by doing and application of theory to professional practice. Short residential periods for peer-to-peer and peer-to-facilitator engagement and learning, interspaced with facilitated workplace based learning, including coaching and mentoring, was the preferred model for programme implementation. The introduction of a pan-African DrPH with a focus on strategic leadership is relevant and timely. Core competencies, optimal design and customization for the sub-Saharan African context has broad consensus in the study setting.