Commercial determinants of health: future directions.

This paper is about the future role of the commercial sector in global health and health equity. The discussion is not about the overthrow of capitalism nor a full-throated embrace of corporate partnerships. No single solution can eradicate the harms from the commercial determinants of health-the business models, practices, and products of market actors that damage health equity and human and planetary health and wellbeing. But evidence shows that progressive economic models, international frameworks, government regulation, compliance mechanisms for commercial entities, regenerative business types and models that incorporate health, social, and environmental goals, and strategic civil society mobilisation together offer possibilities of systemic, transformative change, reduce those harms arising from commercial forces, and foster human and planetary wellbeing. In our view, the most basic public health question is not whether the world has the resources or will to take such actions, but whether humanity can survive if society fails to make this effort.

Defining and conceptualising the commercial determinants of health.

Although commercial entities can contribute positively to health and society there is growing evidence that the products and practices of some commercial actors-notably the largest transnational corporations-are responsible for escalating rates of avoidable ill health, planetary damage, and social and health inequity; these problems are increasingly referred to as the commercial determinants of health. The climate emergency, the non-communicable disease epidemic, and that just four industry sectors (ie, tobacco, ultra-processed food, fossil fuel, and alcohol) already account for at least a third of global deaths illustrate the scale and huge economic cost of the problem. This paper, the first in a Series on the commercial determinants of health, explains how the shift towards market fundamentalism and increasingly powerful transnational corporations has created a pathological system in which commercial actors are increasingly enabled to cause harm and externalise the costs of doing so. Consequently, as harms to human and planetary health increase, commercial sector wealth and power increase, whereas the countervailing forces having to meet these costs (notably individuals, governments, and civil society organisations) become correspondingly impoverished and disempowered or captured by commercial interests. This power imbalance leads to policy inertia; although many policy solutions are available, they are not being implemented. Health harms are escalating, leaving health-care systems increasingly unable to cope. Governments can and must act to improve, rather than continue to threaten, the wellbeing of future generations, development, and economic growth.

Multisectoral interventions and health system performance: a systematic review.

Objective: To conduct a systematic review on the effects of multisectoral interventions for health on health system performance. Methods: We conducted a systematic review according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols. We searched for peer-reviewed journal articles in PubMed®, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 31 August 2023 (updating on 28 February 2024). We removed duplicates, screened titles and abstracts, and then conducted a full-text eligibility and quality assessment. Findings: We identified an initial 1118 non-duplicate publications, 62 of which met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The largest proportions of reviewed studies focused on multisectoral interventions directly related to specific health outcomes (66.1%; 41 studies) and/or social determinants of health (48.4%; 30 studies), but without explicit reference to overall health system performance. Most reviewed publications did not address process indicators (83.9%; 52/62) or discuss sustainability for multisectoral interventions in health (72.6%; 45/62). However, we observed that the greatest proportion (66.1%; 41/62) considered health system goals: health equity (68.3%; 28/41) and health outcomes (63.4%; 26/41). Although the greatest proportion (64.5%; 40/62) proposed mechanisms explaining how multisectoral interventions for health could lead to the intended outcomes, none used realistic evaluations to assess these. Conclusion: Our review has established that multisectoral interventions influence health system performance through immediate improvements in service delivery efficiency, readiness, acceptability and affordability. The interconnectedness of these effects demonstrates their role in addressing the complexities of modern health care.

Chatbots and COVID-19: Taking Stock of the Lessons Learned.

While digital innovation in health was already rapidly evolving, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the generation of digital technology tools, such as chatbots, to help increase access to crucial health information and services to those who were cut off or had limited contact with health services. This theme issue titled "Chatbots and COVID-19" presents articles from researchers and practitioners across the globe, describing the development, implementation, and evaluation of chatbots designed to address a wide range of health concerns and services. In this editorial, we present some of the key challenges and lessons learned arising from the content of this theme issue. Most notably, we note that a stronger evidence base is needed to ensure that chatbots and other digital tools are developed to best serve the needs of population health.

Embedding rapid reviews in health policy and systems decision-making: Impacts and lessons learned from four low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Demand for rapid evidence-based syntheses to inform health policy and systems decision-making has increased worldwide, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To promote use of rapid syntheses in LMICs, the WHO's Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research (AHPSR) created the Embedding Rapid Reviews in Health Systems Decision-Making (ERA) Initiative. Following a call for proposals, four LMICs were selected (Georgia, India, Malaysia and Zimbabwe) and supported for 1 year to embed rapid response platforms within a public institution with a health policy or systems decision-making mandate. METHODS: While the selected platforms had experience in health policy and systems research and evidence syntheses, platforms were less confident conducting rapid evidence syntheses. A technical assistance centre (TAC) was created from the outset to develop and lead a capacity-strengthening program for rapid syntheses, tailored to the platforms based on their original proposals and needs as assessed in a baseline questionnaire. The program included training in rapid synthesis methods, as well as generating synthesis demand, engaging knowledge users and ensuring knowledge uptake. Modalities included live training webinars, in-country workshops and support through phone, email and an online platform. LMICs provided regular updates on policy-makers' requests and the rapid products provided, as well as barriers, facilitators and impacts. Post-initiative, platforms were surveyed. RESULTS: Platforms provided rapid syntheses across a range of AHPSR themes, and successfully engaged national- and state-level policy-makers. Examples of substantial policy impact were observed, including for COVID-19. Although the post-initiative survey response rate was low, three quarters of those responding felt confident in their ability to conduct a rapid evidence synthesis. Lessons learned coalesced around three themes - the importance of context-specific expertise in conducting reviews, facilitating cross-platform learning, and planning for platform sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: The ERA initiative successfully established rapid response platforms in four LMICs. The short timeframe limited the number of rapid products produced, but there were examples of substantial impact and growing demand. We emphasize that LMICs can and should be involved not only in identifying and articulating needs but as co-designers in their own capacity-strengthening programs. More time is required to assess whether these platforms will be sustained for the long-term.

Implementation research on noncommunicable disease prevention and control interventions in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: While the evidence for the clinical effectiveness of most noncommunicable disease (NCD) prevention and treatment interventions is well established, care delivery models and means of scaling these up in a variety of resource-constrained health systems are not. The objective of this review was to synthesize evidence on the current state of implementation research on priority NCD prevention and control interventions provided by health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS AND FINDINGS: On January 20, 2021, we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1990 through 2020 to identify implementation research studies that focused on the World Health Organization (WHO) priority NCD prevention and control interventions targeting cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, and chronic respiratory disease and provided within health systems in LMICs. Any empirical and peer-reviewed studies that focused on these interventions and reported implementation outcomes were eligible for inclusion. Given the focus on this review and the heterogeneity in aims and methodologies of included studies, risk of bias assessment to understand how effect size may have been compromised by bias is not applicable. We instead commented on the distribution of research designs and discussed about stronger/weaker designs. We synthesized extracted data using descriptive statistics and following the review protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021252969). Of 9,683 potential studies and 7,419 unique records screened for inclusion, 222 eligible studies evaluated 265 priority NCD prevention and control interventions implemented in 62 countries (6% in low-income countries and 90% in middle-income countries). The number of studies published has been increasing over time. Nearly 40% of all the studies were on cervical cancer. With regards to intervention type, screening accounted for 49%, treatment for 39%, while prevention for 12% (with 80% of the latter focusing on prevention of the NCD behavior risk factors). Feasibility (38%) was the most studied implementation outcome followed by adoption (23%); few studies addressed sustainability. The implementation strategies were not specified well enough. Most studies used quantitative methods (86%). The weakest study design, preexperimental, and the strongest study design, experimental, were respectively employed in 25% and 24% of included studies. Approximately 72% of studies reported funding, with international funding being the predominant source. The majority of studies were proof of concept or pilot (88%) and targeted the micro level of health system (79%). Less than 5% of studies report using implementation research framework. CONCLUSIONS: Despite growth in implementation research on NCDs in LMICs, we found major gaps in the science. Future studies should prioritize implementation at scale, target higher levels health systems (meso and macro levels), and test sustainability of NCD programs. They should employ designs with stronger internal validity, be more conceptually driven, and use mixed methods to understand mechanisms. To maximize impact of the research under limited resources, adding implementation science outcomes to effectiveness research and regional collaborations are promising.

Normalizing the political economy of improving health.

Problem: Political economy factors are important in determining the adoption and implementation of health policies. Yet these factors are often overlooked in the development of policies that have the potential to influence health. Approach: Political economy analysis provides a way to take into consideration political and social realities, whether at the community, subnational, national, regional or global levels. We aim to demonstrate the value of political economy analysis and to promote its wider use in technical programmes of work. Local setting: We provide examples from across a range of World Health Organization areas of work, including participatory governance, health financing, health taxes, malaria prevention and control, capacity-building and direct country support. Relevant changes: Existing examples of how political economy analysis can be incorporated into technical support demonstrate the variability of this analytical approach, as well as its potential to support policy progress. Applying political economy analysis within the specified programmes of work has enabled more contextually relevant technical support to enhance the likelihood of advancing countries' health-related objectives. Lessons learnt: Embedding political economy into technical work has many benefits, including: enhancing voice and participation in health policies; supporting the adoption and implementation feasibility of technically sound policies; and building capacity to incorporate and understand political factors that influence health-related priorities.

Strategies to adapt and implement health system guidelines and recommendations: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based health system guidelines are pivotal tools to help outline the important financial, policy and service components recommended to achieve a sustainable and resilient health system. However, not all guidelines are readily translatable into practice and/or policy without effective and tailored implementation and adaptation techniques. This scoping review mapped the evidence related to the adaptation and implementation of health system guidelines in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A search strategy was implemented in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, LILACS (VHL Regional Portal), and Web of Science databases in late August 2020. We also searched sources of grey literature and reference lists of potentially relevant reviews. All findings were reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. RESULTS: A total of 41 studies were included in the final set of papers. Common strategies were identified for adapting and implementing health system guidelines, related barriers and enablers, and indicators of success. The most common types of implementation strategies included education, clinical supervision, training and the formation of advisory groups. A paucity of reported information was also identified related to adaptation initiatives. Barriers to and enablers of implementation and adaptation were reported across studies, including the need for financial sustainability. Common approaches to evaluation were identified and included outcomes of interest at both the patient and health system level. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this review suggest several themes in the literature and identify a need for future research to strengthen the evidence base for improving the implementation and adaptation of health system guidelines in low- and middle-income countries. The findings can serve as a future resource for researchers seeking to evaluate implementation and adaptation of health system guidelines. Our findings also suggest that more effort may be required across research, policy and practice sectors to support the adaptation and implementation of health system guidelines to local contexts and health system arrangements in low- and middle-income countries.

Defining Priorities for Action and Research on the Commercial Determinants of Health: A Conceptual Review.

In recent years, the concept of commercial determinants of health (CDoH) has attracted scholarly, public policy, and activist interest. To date, however, this new attention has failed to yield a clear and consistent definition, well-defined metrics for quantifying its impact, or coherent directions for research and intervention. By tracing the origins of this concept over 2 centuries of interactions between market forces and public health action and research, we propose an expanded framework and definition of CDoH. This conceptualization enables public health professionals and researchers to more fully realize the potential of the CDoH concept to yield insights that can be used to improve global and national health and reduce the stark health inequities within and between nations. It also widens the utility of CDoH from its main current use to study noncommunicable diseases to other health conditions such as infectious diseases, mental health conditions, injuries, and exposure to environmental threats. We suggest specific actions that public health professionals can take to transform the burgeoning interest in CDoH into meaningful improvements in health. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(12):2202-2211. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306491).

Building the case for embedding global health security into universal health coverage: a proposal for a unified health system that includes public health.

In the wake of the recent west African Ebola epidemic, there is global consensus on the need for strong health systems; however, agreement is less apparent on effective mechanisms for establishing and maintaining these systems, particularly in resource-constrained settings and in the presence of multiple and sustained stresses (eg, conflict, famine, climate change, and globalisation). The construction of the International Health Regulations (2005) guidelines and the WHO health systems framework, has resulted in the separation of public health functions and health-care services, which are interdependent in actuality and must be integrated to ensure a continuous, unbroken national health system. By analysing efforts to strengthen health systems towards attaining universal health coverage and investments to improve global health security, we examine areas of overlap and offer recommendations for construction of a unified national health system that includes public health. One way towards achieving universal health coverage is to broaden the definition of a health system.

The palm oil industry and noncommunicable diseases.

Large-scale industries do not operate in isolation, but have tangible impacts on human and planetary health. An often overlooked actor in the fight against noncommunicable diseases is the palm oil industry. The dominance of palm oil in the food processing industry makes it the world's most widely produced vegetable oil. We applied the commercial determinants of health framework to analyse the palm oil industry. We highlight the industry's mutually profitable relationship with the processed food industry and its impact on human and planetary health, including detrimental cultivation practices that are linked to respiratory illnesses, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and pollution. This analysis illustrates many parallels to the contested nature of practices adopted by the alcohol and tobacco industries. The article concludes with suggested actions for researchers, policy-makers and the global health community to address and mitigate the negative impacts of the palm oil industry on human and planetary health.

Les grandes industries ne fonctionnent pas en vase clos; elles ont des effets tangibles sur la santé des individus et de la planète. Un acteur souvent négligé dans la lutte contre les maladies non transmissibles est l'industrie de l'huile de palme. Étant donné sa prédominance dans l'industrie alimentaire, l'huile de palme est l'huile végétale la plus largement produite au monde. Nous avons appliqué les déterminants commerciaux de la santé pour analyser l'industrie de l'huile de palme. Nous mettons en évidence la relation mutuellement profitable entre cette industrie et l'industrie des aliments transformés ainsi que ses effets sur la santé des individus et de la planète, et notamment des pratiques culturales néfastes liées à des maladies respiratoires, la déforestation, la diminution de la diversité biologique et la pollution. Cette analyse établit de nombreux parallèles avec la nature contestée de pratiques adoptées par les industries de l'alcool et du tabac. L'article se conclut par des propositions d'action pour que les chercheurs, les responsables politiques et la communauté mondiale de la santé examinent et atténuent les effets négatifs de l'industrie de l'huile de palme sur la santé des individus et de la planète.

Las industrias a gran escala no operan de forma aislada, sino que tienen un impacto tangible en la salud humana y del planeta. Un agente que a menudo se ignora en la lucha contra las enfermedades no contagiosas es la industria del aceite de palma. El predominio del aceite de palma en la industria del procesamiento de alimentos lo convierte en el aceite vegetal más producido del mundo. Se han aplicado los determinantes comerciales del marco de la salud para analizar la industria del aceite de palma. Cabe destacar la relación mutuamente beneficiosa de la industria con la industria de los alimentos procesados y su impacto en la salud humana y del planeta, incluidas las prácticas de cultivo perjudiciales que están relacionadas con las enfermedades respiratorias, la deforestación, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la contaminación. Este análisis ilustra muchos paralelismos con la naturaleza controvertida de las prácticas adoptadas por las industrias del alcohol y el tabaco. El artículo concluye con varias sugerencias de posibles medidas para que los investigadores, los responsables de la formulación de políticas y la comunidad mundial de la salud aborden y mitiguen los impactos negativos de la industria del aceite de palma en la salud humana y del planeta.

Health sector fragmentation: three examples from Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Fragmentation across governance structures, funding, and external actor engagement in Sierra Leone continues to challenge the efficiency and coherence of health sector activities and impedes sustained health system strengthening. Three examples are discussed to highlight the extent, causes, and impacts of health sector fragmentation in Sierra Leone: the community health worker programme, national medical supply chain, and service level agreements. RESULTS: In these examples we discuss factors contributing to fragmentation, the impact on efficiency of systems and sustainability of interventions, and persistent barriers to achieving sustainable improvements in health system performance. Prolonged external dependence and a proliferation of partner and donor involvement tending towards vertical programming and funding have contributed to this fragmentation. CONCLUSION: Alignment of policy and planning initiatives, investment in proactive (to reduce need for reactive) policy and plan development, strengthened partnerships, and strengthened governance and accountability mechanisms offer opportunities for greater health sector integration.

Building from the HIV Response toward Universal Health Coverage.

Jonathan Jay and colleagues draw lessons from the the global HIV response that could help guide the universal health coverage movement.

Overcoming social segregation in health care in Latin America.

Latin America continues to segregate different social groups into separate health-system segments, including two separate public sector blocks: a well resourced social security for salaried workers and their families and a Ministry of Health serving poor and vulnerable people with low standards of quality and needing a frequently impoverishing payment at point of service. This segregation shows Latin America's longstanding economic and social inequality, cemented by an economic framework that predicted that economic growth would lead to rapid formalisation of the economy. Today, the institutional setup that organises the social segregation in health care is perceived, despite improved life expectancy and other advances, as a barrier to fulfilling the right to health, embodied in the legislation of many Latin American countries. This Series paper outlines four phases in the history of Latin American countries that explain the roots of segmentation in health care and describe three paths taken by countries seeking to overcome it: unification of the funds used to finance both social security and Ministry of Health services (one public payer); free choice of provider or insurer; and expansion of services to poor people and the non-salaried population by making explicit the health-care benefits to which all citizens are entitled.

Priority-setting for achieving universal health coverage.

Governments in low- and middle-income countries are legitimizing the implementation of universal health coverage (UHC), following a United Nation's resolution on UHC in 2012 and its reinforcement in the sustainable development goals set in 2015. UHC will differ in each country depending on country contexts and needs, as well as demand and supply in health care. Therefore, fundamental issues such as objectives, users and cost-effectiveness of UHC have been raised by policy-makers and stakeholders. While priority-setting is done on a daily basis by health authorities - implicitly or explicitly - it has not been made clear how priority-setting for UHC should be conducted. We provide justification for explicit health priority-setting and guidance to countries on how to set priorities for UHC.

Les gouvernements des pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire sont en train de légitimer la mise en place de la couverture sanitaire universelle (CSU), suite à une résolution des Nations Unies de 2012 sur la CSU et à son entérinement dans les objectifs de développement durable fixés en 2015. La CSU variera selon les pays, en fonction de leur contexte et de leurs besoins, ainsi qu'en fonction de la demande et de l'offre de soins. Des questions fondamentales ont ainsi été soulevées par les responsables politiques et les parties prenantes, portant notamment sur les objectifs, les utilisateurs et le rapport coût-efficacité de la CSU. Si les autorités sanitaires déterminent quotidiennement des priorités, de façon implicite ou explicite, la marche à suivre pour définir les priorités en matière de CSU n'a pas été clairement établie. Nous justifions ici la nécessité de définir explicitement les priorités dans le domaine de la santé tout en donnant des orientations aux pays pour définir les priorités en matière de CSU.

Los gobiernos de países con ingresos bajos y medios están legitimando la implementación de una cobertura sanitaria universal (CSU) tras un acuerdo de las Naciones Unidas acerca de la cobertura sanitaria universal en 2012 y su consolidación en los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible establecidos en 2015. Cada país tendrá una cobertura sanitaria universal distinta, según el contexto y las necesidades de cada uno, así como la oferta y la demanda de atención sanitaria. Por tanto, los responsables políticos y partes interesadas han abordado los asuntos fundamentales como los objetivos, los usuarios y la rentabilidad de la cobertura sanitaria universal. A pesar de que las autoridades sanitarias han establecido prioridades diarias (de forma implícita o explícita), no se ha aclarado cómo se debería gestionar el establecimiento de prioridades para la cobertura sanitaria universal. Se ofrece una justificación para el establecimiento de prioridades sanitarias explícitas y orientación a los países en la definición de prioridades para la cobertura sanitaria universal.

An assessment of progress towards universal health coverage in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS).

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) represent almost half the world's population, and all five national governments recently committed to work nationally, regionally, and globally to ensure that universal health coverage (UHC) is achieved. This analysis reviews national efforts to achieve UHC. With a broad range of health indicators, life expectancy (ranging from 53 years to 73 years), and mortality rate in children younger than 5 years (ranging from 10·3 to 44·6 deaths per 1000 livebirths), a review of progress in each of the BRICS countries shows that each has some way to go before achieving UHC. The BRICS countries show substantial, and often similar, challenges in moving towards UHC. On the basis of a review of each country, the most pressing problems are: raising insufficient public spending; stewarding mixed private and public health systems; ensuring equity; meeting the demands for more human resources; managing changing demographics and disease burdens; and addressing the social determinants of health. Increases in public funding can be used to show how BRICS health ministries could accelerate progress to achieve UHC. Although all the BRICS countries have devoted increased resources to health, the biggest increase has been in China, which was probably facilitated by China's rapid economic growth. However, the BRICS country with the second highest economic growth, India, has had the least improvement in public funding for health. Future research to understand such different levels of prioritisation of the health sector in these countries could be useful. Similarly, the role of strategic purchasing in working with powerful private sectors, the effect of federal structures, and the implications of investment in primary health care as a foundation for UHC could be explored. These issues could serve as the basis on which BRICS countries focus their efforts to share ideas and strategies.