Design and implementation of a web-based, respondent-driven sampling solution.

BACKGROUND: Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) refers both to a chain-referral sampling method and an analytical model for analysing sampled data. Web-based respondent-driven sampling (webRDS) uses internet-based recruitment coupled with an electronic survey to carry out RDS studies; there is currently no commercially available webRDS solution. We designed and developed a webRDS solution to support a research study aimed at estimating conflict-attributable mortality in Yemen. Our webRDS solution is composed of an existing survey platform (i.e. ODK) and a bespoke RDS system. The RDS system is designed to administer and manage an RDS survey cascade and includes: (1) an application programming interface, (2) a study participant client, and (3) an administrator interface. We report here on the design of the webRDS solution and its implementation. RESULTS: We consulted members of the Yemeni diaspora throughout the development of the solution. Technical obstacles were largely the result of: WhatsApp's policies on bulk messaging and automated messaging behaviour, the inherent constraints of SMS messaging, and SMS filtering behaviour. Language support was straight-forward yet time consuming. Survey uptake was lower than expected. Factors which may have impacted uptake include: our use of consumable survey links, low interest amongst the diaspora population, lack of material incentives, and the length and subject matter of the survey itself. The SMS/WhatsApp messaging integration was relatively complex and limited the information we could send potential participants. CONCLUSION: Despite lower-than expected survey uptake we believe our webRDS solution provides efficient and flexible means to survey a globally diverse population.

Prevalence and burden of HBV co-infection among people living with HIV: A global systematic review and meta-analysis.

Globally, in 2017 35 million people were living with HIV (PLHIV) and 257 million had chronic HBV infection (HBsAg positive). The extent of HIV-HBsAg co-infection is unknown. We undertook a systematic review to estimate the global burden of HBsAg co-infection in PLHIV. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and other databases for published studies (2002-2018) measuring prevalence of HBsAg among PLHIV. The review was registered with PROSPERO (#CRD42019123388). Populations were categorized by HIV-exposure category. The global burden of co-infection was estimated by applying regional co-infection prevalence estimates to UNAIDS estimates of PLHIV. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the odds of HBsAg among PLHIV compared to HIV-negative individuals. We identified 506 estimates (475 studies) of HIV-HBsAg co-infection prevalence from 80/195 (41.0%) countries. Globally, the prevalence of HIV-HBsAg co-infection is 7.6% (IQR 5.6%-12.1%) in PLHIV, or 2.7 million HIV-HBsAg co-infections (IQR 2.0-4.2). The greatest burden (69% of cases; 1.9 million) is in sub-Saharan Africa. Globally, there was little difference in prevalence of HIV-HBsAg co-infection by population group (approximately 6%-7%), but it was slightly higher among people who inject drugs (11.8% IQR 6.0%-16.9%). Odds of HBsAg infection were 1.4 times higher among PLHIV compared to HIV-negative individuals. There is therefore, a high global burden of HIV-HBsAg co-infection, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Key prevention strategies include infant HBV vaccination, including a timely birth-dose. Findings also highlight the importance of targeting PLHIV, especially high-risk groups for testing, catch-up HBV vaccination and other preventative interventions. The global scale-up of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for PLHIV using a tenofovir-based ART regimen provides an opportunity to simultaneously treat those with HBV co-infection, and in pregnant women to also reduce mother-to-child transmission of HBV alongside HIV.

Education, training, and experience in public health ethics and law within the UK public health workforce.

BACKGROUND: Public health ethics and law (PHEL) is a core professional competency for the public health workforce. However, few data are available describing the extent to which UK public health workforce members experience ethical and legal issues or have sufficient educational and/or training background to adequately deal with such issues. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was developed for dissemination via member mailing lists of the: Faculty of Public Health, Royal Society of Public Health, and UK Public Health Register. Public Health England also included a link to the survey in their newsletter. The survey included questions about education, training, and experience in relation to PHEL. The survey was deployed from October 2017 to January 2018. RESULTS: The survey was completed by a diverse sample of five hundred and sixty-two individuals. The majority of respondents reported: (i) regularly encountering ethical issues, (ii) resolving ethical issues through personal reflection, (iii) having little or no education and training in PHEL, and (iv) questioning whether they have dealt with ethical issues encountered in practice in the best way. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that there is a need to develop and support wider PHEL capacity within the UK public health workforce through the provision of PHEL education, training, guidance, and mentoring.

Improving health information systems during an emergency: lessons and recommendations from an Ebola treatment centre in Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: The 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic highlighted the difficulty of collecting patient information during emergencies, especially in highly infectious environments. Health information systems (HISs) appropriate for such settings were lacking prior to this outbreak. Here we describe our development and implementation of paper and electronic HISs at the Sierra Leone Kerry Town Ebola treatment centre (ETC) from 2014 to 2015. We share our approach, experiences, and recommendations for future health emergencies. METHODS: We developed eight fact-finding questions about data-related needs, priorities, and restrictions at the ETC ("inputs") to inform eight structural decisions ("outputs") across six core HIS components. Semi-structured interviews about the "inputs" were then conducted with HIS stakeholders, chosen based on their teams' involvement in ETC HIS-related activities. Their responses were used to formulate the "output" results to guide the HIS design. We implemented the HIS using an Agile approach, monitored system usage, and developed a structured questionnaire on user experiences and opinions. RESULTS: Some key "input" responses were: 1) data needs for priorities (patient care, mandatory reporting); 2) challenges around infection control, limited equipment, and staff clinical/language proficiencies; 3) patient/clinical flows; and 4) weak points from staff turnover, infection control, and changing protocols. Key outputs included: 1) determining essential data, 2) data tool design decisions (e.g. large font sizes, checkboxes/buttons), 3) data communication methods (e.g. radio, "collective memory"), 4) error reduction methods (e.g. check digits, pre-written wristbands), and 5) data storage options (e.g. encrypted files, accessible folders). Implementation involved building data collection tools (e.g. 13 forms), preparing the systems (e.g. supplies), training staff, and maintenance (e.g. removing old forms). Most patients had basic (100%, n = 456/456), drug (96.9%, n = 442/456), and additional clinical/epidemiological (98.9%, n = 451/456) data stored. The questionnaire responses highlighted the importance of usability and simplicity in the HIS. CONCLUSIONS: HISs during emergencies are often ad-hoc and disjointed, but systematic design and implementation can lead to high-quality systems focused on efficiency and ease of use. Many of the processes used and lessons learned from our work are generalizable to other health emergencies. Improvements should be started now to have rapidly adaptable and deployable HISs ready for the next health emergency.

'Care and Prevent': rationale for investigating skin and soft tissue infections and AA amyloidosis among people who inject drugs in London.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs (PWID). International data indicate up to one third of PWID have experienced an SSTI within the past month. Complications include sepsis, endocarditis and amyloid A (AA) amyloidosis. AA amyloidosis is a serious sequela of chronic SSTI among PWID. Though there is a paucity of literature reporting on AA amyloidosis among PWID, what has been published suggests there is likely a causal relationship between AA amyloidosis and injecting-related SSTI. If left untreated, AA amyloidosis can lead to renal failure; premature mortality among diagnosed PWID is high. Early intervention may reverse disease. Despite the high societal and individual burden of SSTI among PWID, empirical evidence on the barriers and facilitators to injecting-related SSTI prevention and care or the feasibility and acceptability of AA amyloidosis screening and treatment referral are limited. This study aims to fill these gaps and assess the prevalence of AA amyloidosis among PWID. METHODS: Care and Prevent is a UK National Institute for Health Research-funded mixed-methods study. In five phases (P1-P5), we aim to assess the evidence for AA amyloidosis among PWID (P1); assess the feasibility of AA amyloidosis screening, diagnostic and treatment referral among PWID in London (P2); investigate the barriers and facilitators to AA amyloidosis care (P3); explore SSTI protection and risk (P4); and co-create harm reduction resources with the affected community (P5). This paper describes the conceptual framework, methodological design and proposed analysis for the mixed-methods multi-phase study. RESULTS: We are implementing the Care and Prevent protocol in London. The systematic review component of the study has been completed and published. Care and Prevent will generate an estimate of AA amyloidosis prevalence among community recruited PWID in London, with implications for the development of screening recommendations and intervention implementation. We aim to recruit 400 PWID from drug treatment services in London, UK. CONCLUSIONS: Care and Prevent is the first study to assess screening feasibility and the prevalence of positive proteinuria, as a marker for AA amyloidosis, among PWID accessing drug treatment services. AA amyloidosis is a serious, yet under-recognised condition for which early intervention is available but not employed.

Ebola exposure, illness experience, and Ebola antibody prevalence in international responders to the West African Ebola epidemic 2014-2016: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare and other front-line workers are at particular risk of infection with Ebola virus (EBOV). Despite the large-scale deployment of international responders, few cases of Ebola virus disease have been diagnosed in this group. Since asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infection has been described, it is plausible that infections have occurred in healthcare workers but have escaped being diagnosed. We aimed to assess the prevalence of asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic infection, and of exposure events, among returned responders to the West African Ebola epidemic 2014-2016. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used snowball sampling to identify responders who had returned to the UK or Ireland, and used an online consent and questionnaire to determine their exposure to EBOV and their experience of illness. Oral fluid collection devices were sent and returned by post, and samples were tested using an EBOV IgG capture assay that detects IgG to Ebola glycoprotein. Blood was collected from returnees with reactive samples for further testing. Unexposed UK controls were also recruited. In all, 300 individuals consented, of whom 268 (89.3%) returned an oral fluid sample (OFS). The majority had worked in Sierra Leone in clinical, laboratory, research, and other roles. Fifty-three UK controls consented and provided samples using the same method. Of the returnees, 47 (17.5%) reported that they had had a possible EBOV exposure. Based on their free-text descriptions, using a published risk assessment method, we classified 43 (16%) as having had incidents with risk of Ebola transmission, including five intermediate-risk and one high-risk exposure. Of the returnees, 57 (21%) reported a febrile or diarrhoeal illness in West Africa or within 1 mo of return, of whom 40 (70%) were not tested at the time for EBOV infection. Of the 268 OFSs, 266 were unreactive. Two returnees, who did not experience an illness in West Africa or on return, had OFSs that were reactive on the EBOV IgG capture assay, with similar results on plasma. One individual had no further positive test results; the other had a positive result on a double-antigen bridging assay but not on a competitive assay or on an indirect EBOV IgG ELISA. All 53 controls had non-reactive OFSs. While the participants were not a random sample of returnees, the number participating was high. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study, to our knowledge, of the prevalence of EBOV infection in international responders. More than 99% had clear negative results. Sera from two individuals had discordant results on the different assays; both were negative on the competitive assay, suggesting that prior infection was unlikely. The finding that a significant proportion experienced "near miss" exposure events, and that most of those who experienced symptoms did not get tested for EBOV at the time, suggests a need to review and standardise protocols for the management of possible exposure to EBOV, and for the management of illness, across organisations that deploy staff to outbreaks.

Adult mortality patterns in Yemen before and during armed conflict: evidence from a web survey of the global diaspora.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing war in Yemen has created a severe and protracted crisis that has left nearly three-quarters of the population in need of urgent humanitarian assistance. Despite eight years of conflict there exist few robust estimates of how the conflict (and the conflict combined with the COVID-19 pandemic) have affected mortality in Yemen. As the security situation has limited access to affected populations we have designed a novel alternative to local mortality surveys. METHODS: We used a web-based, respondent-driven sampling method to disseminate a mortality survey amongst the global Yemeni diaspora. We used Cox proportional hazards survival models to estimate the association between the exposure (i.e. between the pre-conflict, conflict, and conflict/pandemic periods) and mortality risk, adjusted for gender and birth cohort. RESULTS: Eighty-nine eligible respondents completed the survey. Respondents provided data on the status of 1704 individuals of whom 85 (5%) had died; of these 65 (3.8%) were reported to have died in Yemen. An analysis of survivorship of respondents' parents after their 50th birthday (adjusted for gender and birth cohort) provided weak evidence that the war and pandemic periods were associated with higher mortality when compared to the pre-war period. Analysis of the subset of individuals who died in Yemen also suggested an increased, but non-significant hazard of dying during the war/pandemic period: this association tended towards significance when allowing for varying degrees of out-migration from Yemen across the cohort. The number of deaths amongst respondents' siblings and children under five in Yemen were too low to allow meaningful analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest increased mortality during the war/pandemic period, compared to the pre-war period, among older Yemeni adults. However, our findings require careful interpretation as our study design cannot establish causation, and as our small and non-representative sample appeared skewed towards higher-income, urban communities. Surveys of diaspora populations offer a promising means of describing mortality patterns in crisis-affected populations; though, large numbers of respondents are likely required to achieve accurate mortality estimates and to adjust for selection bias.

COVID-19 vaccination decisions among Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities: A qualitative study moving beyond "vaccine hesitancy".

BACKGROUND: Many people refuse vaccination and it is important to understand why. Here we explore the experiences of individuals from Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller groups in England to understand how and why they decided to take up or to avoid COVID-19 vaccinations. METHODS: We used a participatory, qualitative design, including wide consultations, in-depth interviews with 45 individuals from Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller, communities (32 female, 13 male), dialogue sessions, and observations, in five locations across England between October 2021 and February 2022. FINDINGS: Vaccination decisions overall were affected by distrust of health services and government, which stemmed from prior discrimination and barriers to healthcare which persisted or worsened during the pandemic. We found the situation was not adequately characterised by the standard concept of "vaccine hesitancy". Most participants had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose, usually motivated by concerns for their own and others' health. However, many participants felt coerced into vaccination by medical professionals, employers, and government messaging. Some worried about vaccine safety, for example possible impacts on fertility. Their concerns were inadequately addressed or even dismissed by healthcare staff. INTERPRETATION: A standard "vaccine hesitancy" model is of limited use in understanding vaccine uptake in these populations, where authorities and health services have been experienced as untrustworthy in the past (with little improvement during the pandemic). Providing more information may improve vaccine uptake somewhat; however, improved trustworthiness of health services for GRT communities is essential to increase vaccine coverage. FUNDING: This paper reports on independent research commissioned and funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or its arm's length bodies, and other Government Departments.

Provision of cervical screening for transmasculine patients: a review of clinical and programmatic guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Most cervical cancer can be prevented through routine screening. Disparities in uptake of routine screening therefore translate into disparities in cervical cancer incidence and outcomes. Transmasculine people including transgender men experience multiple barriers to cervical screening and their uptake of screening is low compared with cisgender women. Comprehensive evidence-based guidelines are needed to improve cervical screening for this group. METHODS: We searched for and synthesised clinical and programmatic guidelines for the provision of cervical screening for transmasculine patients. FINDINGS: The guidelines offer recommendations addressing: (1) reception, check-in and clinic facilities; (2) patient data and invitation to screening; (3) improving inclusion in screening programmes; and (4) sexual history taking, language and identity. Guidelines offer strategies for alleviating physical and psychological discomfort during cervical screening and recommendations on what to do if the screening procedure cannot be completed. Most of the guidelines were from and for high-income countries. DISCUSSION: The evidence base is limited, but existing guidelines provide recommendations to ensure life-saving screening services are available to all who need them. We were only able to identify one set of guidelines for a middle-income country, and none for low-income countries. We encourage the involvement of transmasculine people in the development of future guidelines.

Measuring supply-side service disruption: a systematic review of the methods for measuring disruption in the context of maternal and newborn health services in low and middle-income settings.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, most essential services experienced some level of disruption. Disruption in LMICs was more severe than in HICs. Early reports suggested that services for maternal and newborn health were disproportionately affected, raising concerns about health equity. Most disruption indicators measure demand-side disruption, or they conflate demand-side and supply-side disruption. There is currently no published guidance on measuring supply-side disruption. The primary objective of this review was to identify methods and approaches used to measure supply-side service disruptions to maternal and newborn health services in the context of COVID-19. DESIGN: We carried out a systematic review and have created a typology of measurement methods and approaches using narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health in January 2023. We also searched the grey literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included empirical studies describing the measurement of supply-side service disruption of maternal and newborn health services in LMICs in the context of COVID-19. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted the aim, method(s), setting, and study outcome(s) from included studies. We synthesised findings by type of measure (ie, provision or quality of services) and methodological approach (ie, qualitative or quantitative). RESULTS: We identified 28 studies describing 5 approaches to measuring supply-side disruption: (1) cross-sectional surveys of the nature and experience of supply-side disruption, (2) surveys to measure temporal changes in service provision or quality, (3) surveys to create composite disruption scores, (4) surveys of service users to measure receipt of services, and (5) clinical observation of the provision and quality of services. CONCLUSION: Our review identified methods and approaches for measuring supply-side service disruption of maternal and newborn health services. These indicators provide important information about the causes and extent of supply-side disruption and provide a useful starting point for developing specific guidance on the measurement of service disruption in LMICs.

Community-led responses to COVID-19 within Gypsy and Traveller communities in England: A participatory qualitative research study.

Individuals were asked to play an active role in infection control in the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet while government messages emphasised taking responsibility for the public good (e.g. to protect the National Health Service), they appeared to overlook social, economic and political factors affecting the ways that people were able to respond. We co-produced participatory qualitative research with members of Gypsy and Traveller communities in England between October 2021 and February 2022 to explore how they had responded to COVID-19, its containment (test, trace, isolate) and the contextual factors affecting COVID-19 risks and responses within the communities. Gypsies and Travellers reported experiencing poor treatment from health services, police harassment, surveillance, and constrained living conditions. For these communities, claiming the right to health in an emergency required them to rely on community networks and resources. They organised collective actions to contain COVID-19 in the face of this ongoing marginalisation, such as using free government COVID-19 tests to support self-designed protective measures including community-facilitated testing and community-led contact tracing. This helped keep families and others safe while minimising engagement with formal institutions. In future emergencies, communities must be given better material, political and technical support to help them to design and implement effective community-led solutions, particularly where government institutions are untrusted or untrustworthy.

Community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a systematic review of drivers of success.

INTRODUCTION: Community-based surveillance may improve early detection and response to disease outbreaks by leveraging the capacity of community members to carry out surveillance activities within their communities. In 2021, the WHO published a report detailing the evidence gaps and research priorities around community-centred approaches to health emergencies. In response, we carried out a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence describing the drivers of success of community-based surveillance systems. METHODS: We included grey literature and peer-reviewed sources presenting empirical findings of the drivers of success of community-based surveillance systems for the detection and reporting of infectious disease-related events. We searched for peer-reviewed literature via MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, SCOPUS and ReliefWeb. We carried out grey literature searches using Google Search and DuckDuckGo. We used an evaluation quality checklist to assess quality. RESULTS: Nineteen sources (17 peer-reviewed and 2 grey literature) met our inclusion criteria. Included sources reported on community-based surveillance for the detection and reporting of a variety of diseases in 15 countries (including three conflict settings). The drivers of success were grouped based on factors relating to: (1) surveillance workers, (2) the community, (3) case detection and reporting, (4) and integration. DISCUSSION: The drivers of success were found to map closely to principles of participatory community engagement with success factors reflecting high levels of acceptability, collaboration, communication, local ownership, and trust. Other factors included: strong supervision and training, a strong sense of responsibility for community health, effective engagement of community informants, close proximity of surveillance workers to communities, the use of simple and adaptable case definitions, quality assurance, effective use of technology, and the use of data for real-time decision-making. Our findings highlight strategies for improving the design and implementation of community-based surveillance. We suggest that investment in participatory community engagement more broadly may be a key surveillance preparedness activity. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022303971.

Ethical guidance or epistemological injustice? The quality and usefulness of ethical guidance for humanitarian workers and agencies.

This paper explores the quality and usefulness of ethical guidance for humanitarian aid workers and their agencies. We focus specifically on public health emergencies, such as COVID-19. The authors undertook a literature review and gathered empirical data through semi-structured focus group discussions amongst front-line workers from health clinics in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh and in the Abyei Special Administrative Area, South Sudan. The purpose of the project was to identify how front-line workers respond to ethical challenges, including any informal or local decision-making processes, support networks, or habits of response.The research findings highlighted a dissonance between ethical guidance and the experiences of front-line humanitarian health workers. They suggest the possibility: (1) that few problems confronting front-line workers are conceived, described, or resolved as ethical problems; and (2) of significant dissonance between available, allegedly practically oriented guidance (often produced by academics in North America and Europe), and the immediate issues confronting front-line workers. The literature review and focus group data suggest a real possibility that there is, at best, a significant epistemic gulf between those who produce ethical guidelines and those engaged in real-time problem solving at the point of contact with people. At worst they suggest a form of epistemic control-an imposition of cognitive shapes that shoehorn the round peg of theoretical preoccupations and the disciplinary boundaries of western academies into the square hole of front-line humanitarian practice.

Social contacts and other risk factors for respiratory infections among internally displaced people in Somaliland.

BACKGROUND: Populations affected by humanitarian crises experience high burdens of acute respiratory infections (ARI), potentially driven by risk factors for severe disease such as poor nutrition and underlying conditions, and risk factors that may increase transmission such as overcrowding and the possibility of high social mixing. However, little is known about social mixing patterns in these populations. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional social contact survey among internally displaced people (IDP) living in Digaale, a permanent IDP camp in Somaliland. We included questions on household demographics, shelter quality, crowding, travel frequency, health status, and recent diagnosis of pneumonia, and assessed anthropometric status in children. We present the prevalence of several risk factors relevant to transmission of respiratory infections, and calculated age-standardised social contact matrices to assess population mixing. RESULTS: We found crowded households with high proportions of recent self-reported pneumonia (46% in children). 20% of children younger than five are stunted, and crude death rates are high in all age groups. ARI risk factors were common. Participants reported around 10 direct contacts per day. Social contact patterns are assortative by age, and physical contact rates are very high (78%). CONCLUSIONS: ARI risk factors are very common in this population, while the large degree of contacts that involve physical touch could further increase transmission. Such IDP settings potentially present a perfect storm of risk factors for ARIs and their transmission, and innovative approaches to address such risks are urgently needed.

Methods to measure effects of social accountability interventions in reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health programs: systematic review and critique.

BACKGROUND: There is no agreed way to measure the effects of social accountability interventions. Studies to examine whether and how social accountability and collective action processes contribute to better health and healthcare services are underway in different areas of health, and health effects are captured using a range of different research designs. OBJECTIVES: The objective of our review is to help inform evaluation efforts by identifying, summarizing, and critically appraising study designs used to assess and measure social accountability interventions' effects on health, including data collection methods and outcome measures. Specifically, we consider the designs used to assess social accountability interventions for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (RMNCAH). DATA SOURCES: Data were obtained from the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Social Policy & Practice databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included papers published on or after 1 January 2009 that described an evaluation of the effects of a social accountability intervention on RMNCAH. RESULTS: Twenty-two papers met our inclusion criteria. Methods for assessing or reporting health effects of social accountability interventions varied widely and included longitudinal, ethnographic, and experimental designs. Surprisingly, given the topic area, there were no studies that took an explicit systems-orientated approach. Data collection methods ranged from quantitative scorecard data through to in-depth interviews and observations. Analysis of how interventions achieved their effects relied on qualitative data, whereas quantitative data often raised rather than answered questions, and/or seemed likely to be poor quality. Few studies reported on negative effects or harms; studies did not always draw on any particular theoretical framework. None of the studies where there appeared to be financial dependencies between the evaluators and the intervention implementation teams reflected on whether or how these dependencies might have affected the evaluation. The interventions evaluated in the included studies fell into the following categories: aid chain partnership, social audit, community-based monitoring, community-linked maternal death review, community mobilization for improved health, community reporting hotline, evidence for action, report cards, scorecards, and strengthening health communities. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of methods are currently being used to attempt to evaluate effects of social accountability interventions. The wider context of interventions including the historical or social context is important, as shown in the few studies to consider these dimensions. While many studies collect useful qualitative data that help illuminate how and whether interventions work, the data and analysis are often limited in scope with little attention to the wider context. Future studies taking into account broader sociopolitical dimensions are likely to help illuminate processes of accountability and inform questions of transferability of interventions. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration # CRD42018108252).

COVID-19 testing acceptability and uptake amongst the Rohingya and host community in Camp 21, Teknaf, Bangladesh.

Facility-based sentinel testing for COVID-19 was implemented in May 2020 to monitor the prevalence of COVID-19 amongst the Rohingya and host community in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. In response both to low uptake of testing across all camps, and rumours of an outbreak of an influenza-like illness in May/June 2020, the International Organization for Migration (in partnership with ACAPS) undertook a qualitative study to collect accounts from the Rohingya relating to testing and treatment, and to explore the possibility that what was thought to be an outbreak of influenza may have been COVID-19. The report provided rich descriptions of the apprehension around testing and offered some clear recommendations for addressing these. We developed a testing 'script' in response to these recommendations, deploying it alongside a survey to determine reasons for declining a test. We compared testing uptake before deploying the testing script, and after (controlling for the total number of consultations), to generate a crude measure of the impact of the script on testing uptake. We coded reasons for declining a test thematically, disaggregated by status (Rohingya and host community) and sex. Despite the small sample size our results suggest an increase in testing uptake following the implementation of the script. Reasons provided by patients for declining a test included: 1) fear, 2) the belief that COVID-19 does not exist, that Allah will prevent them from contracting it, or that their symptoms are not caused by COVID-19, 3) no permission from husband/family, and 4) a preference to return at a later time for a test. Our findings largely mirror the qualitative accounts in the International Organization for Migration/ACAPS report and suggest that further testing amongst both populations will be complicated by fear, and a lack of clarity around testing. Our data lend force to the recommendations in the International Organization for Migration/ACAPS report and emphasise that contextual factors play a key role and must be considered in designing and implementing a health response to a novel disease.

Preparing humanitarians to address ethical problems.

Infectious disease outbreaks represent potentially catastrophic threats to those affected by humanitarian crises. High transmissibility, crowded living conditions, widespread co-morbidities, and a lack of intensive care capacity may amplify the effects of the outbreak on already vulnerable populations and present humanitarian actors with intense ethical problems. We argue that there are significant and troubling gaps in ethical awareness at the level of humanitarian praxis. Though some ethical guidance does exist most of it is directed at public health experts and fails to speak to the day-to-day ethical challenges confronted by frontline humanitarians. In responding to infectious disease outbreaks humanitarian workers are likely to grapple with complex dilemmas opening the door to moral distress and burnout.

Mobile clinics in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread reliance on mobile clinics for delivering health services in humanitarian emergencies there is little empirical evidence to support their use. We report a narrative systematic review of the empirical evidence evaluating the use of mobile clinics in humanitarian settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Health Management Information Consortium, and The Cochrane Library for manuscripts published between 2000 and 2019. We also conducted a grey literature search via Global Health, Open Grey, and the WHO publication database. Empirical studies were included if they reported on at least one of the following evaluation criteria: relevance/appropriateness, connectedness, coherence, coverage, efficiency, effectiveness, and impact. FINDINGS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria: all supported the use of mobile clinics in the particular setting under study. Three studies included controls. Two studies were assessed as good quality. The studies reported on mobile clinics providing non-communicable disease interventions, mental health services, sexual and reproductive health services, and multiple primary health care services in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo , Haiti, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Studies assessed one or more of the following evaluation domains: relevance/appropriateness, coverage, efficiency, and effectiveness. Four studies made recommendations including: i) ensure that mobile clinics are designed to complement clinic-based services; ii) improve technological tools to support patient follow-up, improve record-keeping, communication, and coordination; iii) avoid labelling services in a way that might stigmatise attendees; iv) strengthen referral to psychosocial and mental health services; v) partner with local providers to leverage resources; and vi) ensure strong coordination to optimise the continuum of care. Recommendations regarding the evaluation of mobile clinics include carrying out comparative studies of various modalities (including fixed facilities and community health workers) in order to isolate the effects of the mobile clinics. In the absence of a sound evidence base informing the use of mobile clinics in humanitarian crises, we encourage the integration of: i) WASH services, ii) nutrition services, iii) epidemic surveillance, and iv) systems to ensure the quality and safety of patient care. We recommend that future evaluations report against an established evaluation framework. CONCLUSION: Evidence supporting the use of mobile clinics in humanitarian emergencies is limited. We encourage more studies of the use of mobile clinics in emergency settings. FUNDING: Salary support for this review was provided under the RECAP project by United Kingdom Research and Innovation as part of the Global Challenges Research Fund, grant number ES/P010873/1.

A graphic elicitation technique to represent patient rights.

BACKGROUND: A patient charter is an explicit declaration of the rights of patients within a particular health care setting. In early 2020 the Save the Children Emergency Health Unit deployed to Cox's Bazar Bangladesh to support the establishment of a severe acute respiratory infection isolation and treatment centre as part of the COVID-19 response. We developed a charter of patient rights and had it translated into Bangla and Burmese; however, the charter remained inaccessible to Rohingya and members of the host community with low literacy. METHODS: To both visualise and contextualise the patient charter we undertook a graphic elicitation method involving both the Rohingya and host communities. We carried out two focus group discussions during which we discussed the charter and agreed how best to illustrate the individual rights contained therein. RESULTS: Logistical constraints and infection prevention and control procedures limited our ability to follow up with the original focus group participants and to engage in back-translation as we had planned; however, we were able to elicit rich descriptions of each right. Reflecting on our method we were able to identify several key learnings relating to: 1) our technique for eliciting feedback on the charter verbatim versus a broader discussion of concepts referenced within each right, 2) our decision to include both men and women in the same focus group, 3) our decision to ask focus group participants to describe specific features of each illustration and how this benefited the inclusivity of our illustrations, and 4) the potential of the focus groups to act as a means to introduce the charter to communities. CONCLUSIONS: Though executing our method was operationally challenging we were able to create culturally appropriate illustrations to accompany our patient charter. In contexts of limited literacy it is possible to enable access to critical clinical governance and accountability tools.