The added value of applying a disinvestment approach to the process of health technology assessment in Italy.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present policy analysis was to understand how a disinvestment approach to the process of health technology assessment (HTA), applied to the field of medical devices, might help Italian policymakers to properly spend the resources in healthcare. METHODS: Previous international and national experiences in disinvestment for medical devices were reviewed. Precious insights for the rational expenditure of the resources were derived by assessing the evidence available. RESULTS: The disinvestment of ineffective or inappropriate technologies or interventions with an inadequate value-for-money ratio has become a growing priority for National Health Systems. Different international disinvestment experiences of medical devices were identified and described through a rapid review. Although most of them have a strong theoretical framework, their practical application remains difficult. In Italy, there are no examples of large and complex HTA-based disinvestment practices, but their importance is becoming increasingly acknowledged, especially given the need to prioritize the funds provided by Recovery and Resilience Plan. CONCLUSIONS: Anchoring decisions on health technologies without reassessing the current technological landscape through a robust HTA model might expose to the risk of not ensuring the best employment of the resources available. Thus, it is necessary to develop a strong HTA ecosystem in Italy through adequate consultation with stakeholders to enable a data-driven and evidence-based prioritization of resources toward choices characterized by high value for both patients and society as a whole.

A cross-country comparison of Covid-19 containment measures and their effects on the epidemic curves.

BACKGROUND: European countries are still searching to eliminate or contain the Covid-19 pandemic. A variety of approaches have achieved different levels of success in limiting the spread of the disease early and preventing avoidable deaths. Governmental policy responses may explain these differences and this study aims to describe evidence about the effectiveness of containment measures throughout the course of the pandemic in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK). METHODS: The research approach adopted consisted of three steps: 1) Build a Containment Index (C.I.) that considers nine parameters to make an assessment on the strength of measures; 2) Develop dynamic epidemiological models for forecasting purposes; 3) Predict case numbers by assuming containment measures remain constant for a period of 30 days. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that in the five European countries we compared, the use of different approaches definitively affected the effectiveness of containment measures for the Covid-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The evidence found in our research can be useful to inform policy makers' decisions when deciding to introduce or relax containment measures and their timing, both during the current pandemic or in addressing possible future health crises.

Use of oxygen-ozone therapy to improve the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment on infected arthroplasty: protocol for a superiority, open-label, multicentre, randomised, parallel trial.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infections still remain a major public health challenge and have become an increasing universal risk, especially for the implantation of orthopaedic devices.Unfortunately, the discovery and increasingly widespread use (especially the misuse) of antibiotics have led to the rapid appearance of antibiotic-resistant strains today; more and more infections are caused by microorganisms that fail to respond to conventional treatments.Oxygen-ozone therapy has been extensively used and studied for decades across various potential medical applications and has provided consistent effects with minimal side effects.This study aims to determine the superiority of oxygen-ozone therapy in combination with oral antibiotic therapy in patients with wound infections after an orthopaedic device implantation when compared with antibiotic therapy alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, parallel-group study that aims to assess the efficacy and safety of oxygen-ozone therapy in combination with oral antibiotic therapy to treat infections in patients (male or female aged ≥18 years) having undergone surgery for the implant of an orthopaedic device. Patients must have at least one (but no more than three) postoperative wounds in the site of surgery (ulcers, eschars and sores) and at least one symptom (pain, burning, redness and malodour) and at least one sign (erythema, local warmth, swelling and purulent secretion) of infection of at least moderate intensity (score ≥2) in the target lesion at the screening visit (patients with wounds without signs of localised infection or with undermining wounds will be excluded).Patients (n=186) will be recruited from five Italian hospitals and studied for 7 weeks. All will be assigned to one of the two treatment groups according to a web-based, centralised randomisation procedure and placed into either the (1) intervention: oxygen-ozone therapy 2-3 times a week for 6 weeks (for a maximum of 15 sessions) simultaneously with an appropriate oral antibiotic therapy prescribed at baseline or (2) control: oral antibiotic therapy prescribed at baseline.The primary outcome is the efficacy and superiority of the treatment (ozone and oral antibiotic therapies); secondary outcomes include the resolution of signs and symptoms, modifications in lesion size and the treatment's safety and tolerability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been reviewed and approved by the responsible Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) of COMITATO ETICO CAMPANIA NORD, located at 'Azienda Ospedaliera San Giuseppe Moscati di Avellino'.After completion of the study, the project coordinator will prepare a draft manuscript containing the final results of the study on the basis of the statistical analysis. The manuscript will be derived by the co-authors for comments, and after revision, it will be sent to a major scientific journal. Findings will be disseminated via online and print media, events and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04787575.

Health data sharing attitudes towards primary and secondary use of data: a systematic review.

Background: To receive the best care, people share their health data (HD) with their health practitioners (known as sharing HD for primary purposes). However, during the past two decades, sharing for other (i.e., secondary) purposes has become of great importance in numerous fields, including public health, personalized medicine, research, and development. We aimed to conduct the first comprehensive overview of all studies that investigated people's HD sharing attitudes-along with associated barriers/motivators and significant influencing factors-for all data types and across both primary and secondary uses. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL for relevant studies published in English between database inception and February 28, 2023, using a predefined set of keywords. Studies were included, regardless of their design, if they reported outcomes related to attitudes towards sharing HD. We extracted key data from the included studies, including the type of HD involved and findings related to: HD sharing attitudes (either in general or depending on type of data/user); barriers/motivators/benefits/concerns of the study participants; and sociodemographic and other variables that could impact HD sharing behaviour. The qualitative synthesis was conducted by dividing the studies according to the data type (resulting in five subgroups) as well as the purpose the data sharing was focused on (primary, secondary or both). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of non-randomised studies. This work was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023413822. Findings: Of 2109 studies identified through our search, 116 were included in the qualitative synthesis, yielding a total of 228,501 participants and various types of HD represented: person-generated HD (n = 17 studies and 10,771 participants), personal HD in general (n = 69 studies and 117,054 participants), Biobank data (n = 7 studies and 27,073 participants), genomic data (n = 13 studies and 54,716 participants), and miscellaneous data (n = 10 studies and 18,887 participants). The majority of studies had a moderate level of quality (83 [71.6%] of 116 studies), but varying levels of quality were observed across the included studies. Overall, studies suggest that sharing intentions for primary purposes were observed to be high regardless of data type, and it was higher than sharing intentions for secondary purposes. Sharing for secondary purposes yielded variable findings, where both the highest and the lowest intention rates were observed in the case of studies that explored sharing biobank data (98% and 10%, respectively). Several influencing factors on sharing intentions were identified, such as the type of data recipient, data, consent. Further, concerns related to data sharing that were found to be mutual for all data types included privacy, security, and data access/control, while the perceived benefits included those related to improvements in healthcare. Findings regarding attitudes towards sharing varied significantly across sociodemographic factors and depended on data type and type of use. In most cases, these findings were derived from single studies and therefore warrant confirmations from additional studies. Interpretation: Sharing health data is a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (the type of health data, the intended use, the data recipient, among others) and these insights could be used to overcome barriers, address people's concerns, and focus on spreading awareness about the data sharing process and benefits. Funding: None.

Can revenue collection for public funding in health care be progressive? An assessment of 29 Countries.

Most research on health care equity focuses on accessing services, with less attention given to how revenue is collected to pay for a country's health care bill. This article examines the progressivity of revenue collection among publicly funded sources: income taxes, social insurance (often in the form of payroll) taxes, and consumption taxes (e.g., value-added taxes). We develop methodology to derive a qualitative index that rates each of 29 high-income countries as to its progressivity or regressivity for each of the three sources of revenue. A variety of data sources are employed, some from secondary data sources and other from country representatives of the Health Systems and Policy Monitor of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. We found that countries with more progressive income tax systems used more income-based tax brackets and had larger differences in marginal tax rates between the brackets. The more progressive social insurance revenue collection systems did not have an upper income cap and exempted poorer persons or reduced their contributions. The only pattern regarding consumption taxes was that countries that exhibited the fewest overall income inequalities tended to have least regressive consumption tax policies. The article also provides several examples from the sample of countries on ways to make public revenue financing of health care more progressive.

Strategies and bottlenecks to tackle infodemic in public health: a scoping review.

Background: The World Health Organization defines "infodemic" as the phenomenon of an uncontrolled spread of information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak, causing confusion and risk-taking behaviors that can harm health. The aim of this scoping review is to examine international evidence and identify strategies and bottlenecks to tackle health-related fake news. Methods: We performed a scoping review of the literature from 1 January 2018 to 26 January 2023 on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases. We also performed a search of grey literature on institutional websites. The research question has been defined according to the PCC (population, concept, and context) mnemonic for constructing research questions in scoping reviews. Results: The overall research in the scientific databases yielded a total of 5,516 records. After removing duplicates, and screening the titles, abstracts, and full texts, we included 21 articles from scientific literature. Moreover, 5 documents were retrieved from institutional websites. Based on their content, we decided to group recommendations and bottlenecks into five different and well-defined areas of intervention, which we called strategies: "foster proper communication through the collaboration between science and social media companies and users," "institutional and regulatory interventions," "check and debunking," "increase health literacy," and "surveillance and monitoring through new digital tools." Conclusion: The multidisciplinary creation of standardized toolkits that collect recommendations from the literature and institutions can provide a valid solution to limit the infodemic, increasing the health education of both citizens and health professionals, providing the knowledge to recognize fake news, as well as supporting the creation and validation of AI tools aimed at prebunking and debunking.

Research ethics committee auditing: the experience of a university hospital.

The authors report the first Italian experience of a research ethics committee (REC) audit focused on the evaluation of the REC's compliance with standard operating procedures, requirements in insurance coverage, informed consent, protection of privacy and confidentiality, predictable risks/harms, selection of subjects, withdrawal criteria and other issues, such as advertisement details and justification of placebo. The internal audit was conducted over a two-year period (March 2009-February 2011) divided into quarters to better value the influence of the new insurance coverage regulation that came into effect in March 2010 (Ministerial Decree of 14 July, 2009) and expand the requirements to safeguard participants in clinical drug trials including other critical items as information and consent and the risks to benefits ratio. Out of a total of 639 REC's opinions and research studies, 316 were reviewed. Regarding the insurance policy requirements, Auditor/REC non-compliance occurred only in one case. The highest number of Auditor/REC non-compliance was in regard to information and consent, which should have incurred a suspended decision rather than a favorable opinion. This internal audit shows the importance and the difficulty of the review process. For this reason, specific courses for members of the research ethics committee and for those who aspire to become auditors will be provided. There may also be efforts to improve the standard operating procedures already in place.

Effects of the Italian Law on Patient Safety and Health Professional Responsibilities Five Years after Its Approval by the Italian Parliament.

The application of the Italian law No. 24/2017, which focused on patient safety and medical liability, in the Italian National Health Service has been evaluated by a survey conducted five years after the promulgation of the law. The law required the establishment of healthcare risk management and patient safety centers in all Italian regions and the appointment of a Clinical Risk Manager (CRM) in all Italian public and private healthcare facilities. This study demonstrates that five years after the approval of the law, it has not yet been fully implemented. The survey revealed a lack of adequate permanent staff in all the Regional Centers, with two employees on average per Center. Few meetings were held with the Regional Healthcare System decision-makers with less than four meetings per year. This reduces the capacity to carry out functions. In addition, the role of the CRMs is weak in most healthcare facilities. More than 20% of CRMs have other roles in the same organization. Some important tasks have reduced application, e.g., assessment of the inappropriateness risk (reported only by 35.3% of CRM) and use of patient safety indicators for monitoring hospitals (20.6% of CRM). The function of the Regional Centers during the COVID-19 pandemic was limited despite the CRMs being very committed. The CRMs units undertake limited research and have reduced collaboration with citizen associations. Despite most of the CRMs believing that the law has had an important role in improving patient safety, 70% of them identified clinicians' resistance to change and lack of funding dedicated to implementing the law as the main barriers to the management of risk.

Public health leadership in the COVID-19 era: how does it fit? A scoping review.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put a lot of pressure on all the world's health systems and public health leaders who have often found themselves unprepared to handle an emergency of this magnitude. This study aims to bring together published evidence on the qualities required to leaders to deal with a public health issue like the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. A search of relevant articles was performed in the PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases. A total of 2499 records were screened, and 45 articles were included, from which 93 characteristics of effective leadership were extrapolated and grouped into 6 clusters. The qualities most frequently reported in the articles were human traits and emotional intelligence (46.7%) and communication skills such as transparency and reliability (48.9%). Responsiveness and preparedness (40%), management skills (33.3%) and team working (35.6%) are considered by a significant percentage of the articles as necessary for the construction of rapid and effective measures in response to the emergency. A considerable proportion of articles also highlighted the need for leaders capable of making evidence-based decisions and driving innovation (31.1%). Although identifying leaders who possess all the skills described in this study appears complex, determining the key characteristics of effective public health leadership in a crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, is useful not only in selecting future leaders but also in implementing training and education programmes for the public health workforce.

Strengthening and promoting digital health practice: results from a Global Digital Health Partnership's survey.

Background and objective: The capacity to promote and disseminate the best evidence-based practices in terms of digital health innovations and technologies represents an important goal for countries and governments. To support the digital health maturity across countries the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP) was established in 2019. The mission of the GDHP is to facilitate global collaboration and knowledge-sharing in the design of digital health services, through the administration of surveys and white papers. Objective: The scope of this study is to critically analyze and discuss results from the Evidence and Evaluation GDHP Work Stream's survey, understand how governments and countries intend to address main obstacles to the digital health implementation, identify their strategies for a communication of effective digital health services, and promote the sharing of international based best practices on digital health. Methods: This survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. A multiple-choice questionnaire was designed to gather data. Choices were extracted from research publications retrieved through a rapid review. Results: Out of 29 countries receiving the survey, 10 returned it. On a scale from 1 to 5, eHealth systems/platforms (mean = 3.56) were indicated as the most important tool for centralized infrastructure to collect information on digital health, while primary care (mean = 4.0) represented the most voted item for healthcare services to collect information on digital health. Seven Countries out of 10 identified lack of organization, skepticism of clinicians, and accessibility of the population as a barriers to adopt digital health implementation, resulting to be the most voted items. Finally, the most endorsed priorities in digital health for Countries were the adoption of data-driven approaches (6 Countries), and telehealth (5 Countries). Conclusion: This survey highlighted the main tools and obstacles for countries to promote the implementation of evidence-based digital health innovations. Identifying strategies that would communicate the value of health care information technology to healthcare professionals are particularly imperative. Effective communication programs for clinicians and the general population in addition to improved digital health literacy (both for clinicians and citizens) will be the key for the real implementation of future digital health technologies.

Challenges facing mental health systems arising from the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from 14 European and North American countries.

We assessed challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic presented for mental health systems and the responses to these challenges in 14 countries in Europe and North America. Experts from each country filled out a structured questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions between January and June 2021. We conducted thematic analysis to investigate the qualitative responses to open-ended questions, and we summarized the responses to closed-ended survey items on changes in telemental health policies and regulations. Findings revealed that many countries grappled with the rising demand for mental health services against a backdrop of mental health provider shortages and challenges responding to workforce stress and burnout. All countries in our sample implemented new policies or initiatives to strengthen mental health service delivery - with more than two-thirds investing to bolster their specialized mental health care sector. There was a universal shift to telehealth to deliver a larger portion of mental health services in all 14 countries, which was facilitated by changes in national regulations and policies; 11 of the 14 participating countries relaxed regulations and 10 of 14 countries made changes to reimbursement policies to facilitate telemental health care. These findings provide a first step to assess the long-term challenges and re-organizational effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health systems in Europe and North America.

A Process Mining Pipeline to Characterize COVID-19 Patients' Trajectories and Identify Relevant Temporal Phenotypes From EHR Data.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic involved the disruption of the processes of care and the need for immediately effective re-organizational procedures. In the context of digital health, it is of paramount importance to determine how a specific patients' population reflects into the healthcare dynamics of the hospital, to investigate how patients' sub-group/strata respond to the different care processes, in order to generate novel hypotheses regarding the most effective healthcare strategies. We present an analysis pipeline based on the heterogeneous collected data aimed at identifying the most frequent healthcare processes patterns, jointly analyzing them with demographic and physiological disease trajectories, and stratify the observed cohort on the basis of the mined patterns. This is a process-oriented pipeline which integrates process mining algorithms, and trajectory mining by topological data analyses and pseudo time approaches. Data was collected for 1,179 COVID-19 positive patients, hospitalized at the Italian Hospital "Istituti Clinici Salvatore Maugeri" in Lombardy, integrating different sources including text admission letters, EHR and hospital infrastructure data. We identified five temporal phenotypes, from laboratory values trajectories, which are characterized by statistically significant different death risk estimates. The process mining algorithms allowed splitting the data in sub-cohorts as function of the pandemic waves and of the temporal trajectories showing statistically significant differences in terms of events characteristics.

Is blockchain the breakthrough we are looking for to facilitate genomic data sharing? The European Union perspective.

The recent progress of genomics research is providing unprecedented insight into human genetic variance, susceptibility to disease and risk stratification. Current trends predict that a massive amount of genomic data will be produced in the upcoming years which, when coupled with the fast-paced development of the field, will create new social, ethical, and legal challenges. In the complex legislative environment of the European Union, genomic data sharing policies will have to weigh the benefits of scientific discovery against the ethical risks posed by the act of sharing sensitive data. In this complex, interconnected environment, blockchain provides a unique and novel solution to accountability, traceability, and transparency issues regarding genomic data sharing. Implementing a distributed ledger technology-based database could empower both patients and citizens to responsibly use genomic data pertaining to them because it allows for a higher degree of control over the recipients of their data and their uses. The blockchain technology will engage both data owners and policymakers to address the multiple issues of genomic data sharing and allow us to redefine the way we look at genomics.

The cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions: A systematic review of the literature.

Background: Digital health interventions have significant potential to improve safety, efficacy, and quality of care, reducing waste in healthcare costs. Despite these premises, the evidence regarding cost and effectiveness of digital tools in health is scarce and limited. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions and to assess whether the studies meet the established quality criteria. Methods: We queried PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for articles in English published from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 that performed economic evaluations of digital health technologies. The methodological rigorousness of studies was assessed with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2009 checklist. Results: Search identified 1,476 results, 552 of which were selected for abstract and 35 were included in this review. The studies were heterogeneous by country (mostly conducted in upper and upper-middle income countries), type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The qualitative analysis identified the economic and effectiveness evaluation of six different types of interventions: (1) seventeen studies on new video-monitoring service systems; (2) five studies on text messaging interventions; (3) five studies on web platforms and digital health portals; (4) two studies on telephone support; (5) three studies on new mobile phone-based systems and applications; and (6) three studies on digital technologies and innovations. Conclusion: Findings on cost-effectiveness of digital interventions showed a growing body of evidence and suggested a generally favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. However, due to the heterogeneity across study methods, the comparison between interventions still remains difficult. Further research based on a standardized approach is needed in order to methodically analyze incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, and health benefits.

Scoping review of the current landscape of AI-based applications in clinical trials.

Background: Clinical trials are essential for bringing new drugs, technologies and procedures to the market and clinical practice. Considering the design and the four-phase development, only 10% of them complete the entire process, partly due to the increasing costs and complexity of clinical trials. This low completion rate has a huge negative impact in terms of population health, quality of care and health economics and sustainability. Automating some of the process' tasks with artificial intelligence (AI) tools could optimize some of the most burdensome ones, like patient selection, matching and enrollment; better patient selection could also reduce harmful treatment side effects. Although the pharmaceutical industry is embracing artificial AI tools, there is little evidence in the literature of their application in clinical trials. Methods: To address this issue, we performed a scoping review. Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we performed a search on PubMed for articles on the implementation of AI in the development of clinical trials. Results: The search yielded 772 articles, of which 15 were included. The articles were published between 2019 and 2022 and the results were presented descriptively. About half of the studies addressed the topic of patient recruitment; 12 articles reported specific examples of AI applications; five studies presented a quantitative estimate of the effectiveness of these tools. Conclusion: All studies present encouraging results on the implementation of AI-based applications to the development of clinical trials. AI-based applications have a lot of potential, but more studies are needed to validate these tools and facilitate their adoption.

Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature.

Background: Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219). Findings: Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate - 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals. Interpretation: This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy. Funding: None.

Governance of academic medical centres in changing healthcare systems: An international comparison.

We provide an explorative and international comparison of the governance models of academic medical centres (AMCs). These centres face significant challenges, including disruptive external pressures and enduring financial conflicts pertaining to patient treatment, research and education. Therefore, we covered 10 European countries (Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Spain) and one associated state (Israel) in our analysis. In addition, we developed an expert questionnaire to collect data on the governance of AMCs in these 11 countries. Our results revealed no standardised definition of AMCs, with countries combining patient care, education/teaching and research differently. However, the ownership of such institutions is significantly homogeneous and is limited to public or private, nonprofit ownership. Furthermore, significant differences are associated with the (functional) integration level between the hospital and medical school. Therefore, most experts believe that the governance of AMCs will evolve into a more functionally integrated model of patient care, research and education.

Approaches to priority identification in digital health in ten countries of the Global Digital Health Partnership.

Background: To promote shared digital health best practices in a global context, as agreed within the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP), one of the most important topics to evaluate is the ability to detect what participating countries believe to be priorities suitable to improve their healthcare systems. No previously published scientific papers investigated these aspects as a cross-country comparison. Objective: The aim of this paper is to present results concerning the priorities identification section of the Evidence and Evaluation survey addressed to GDHP members in 2021, comparing countries' initiatives and perspectives for the future of digital health based on internationally agreed developments. Methods: This survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. An online survey was addressed to the stakeholders of 29 major countries. Results: Ten out of 29 countries answered the survey. The mean global score of 3.54 out of 5, calculated on the whole data set, demonstrates how the global attention to a digital evolution in health is shared by most of the evaluated countries. Conclusion: The resulting insights on the differences between digital health priority identification among different GDHP countries serves as a starting point to coordinate further progress on digital health worldwide and foster evidence-based collaboration.

Italy: Health System Review.

This analysis of the Italian health system reviews recent developments in organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. Italy has a regionalized National Health Service (SSN) that provides universal coverage largely free of charge at the point of delivery, though certain services and goods require a co-payment. Life expectancy in Italy is historically among the highest in the EU. However, regional differences in health indicators are marked, as well as in per capita spending, distribution of health professionals and in the quality of health services. Overall, Italy's health spending per capita is lower than the EU average and is among the lowest in western European countries. Private spending has increased in recent years, although this trend was halted in 2020 during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A key focus of health policies in recent decades was to promote a shift away from unnecessary inpatient care, with a considerable reduction of acute hospital beds and stagnating overall growth in health personnel. However, this was not counterbalanced by a sufficient strengthening of community services in order to cope with the ageing population's needs and related chronic conditions burden. This had important repercussions during the COVID-19 emergency, as the health system felt the impact of previous reductions in hospital beds and capacity and underinvestment in community-based care. Reorganizing hospital and community care will require a strong alignment between central and regional authorities. The COVID-19 crisis also highlighted several issues pre-dating the pandemic that need to be addressed to improve the sustainability and resilience of the SSN. The main outstanding challenges for the health system are linked to addressing historic underinvestment in the health workforce, modernizing outdated infrastructure and equipment, and enhancing information infrastructure. Italy's National Recovery and Resilience Plan, underwritten by the Next Generation EU budget to assist with economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, contains specific health sector priorities, such as strengthening the country's primary and community care, boosting capital investment and funding the digitalization of the health care system.

European Health Data Space-An Opportunity Now to Grasp the Future of Data-Driven Healthcare.

The May 2022 proposal from the European commission for a 'European health data space' envisages advantages for health from exploiting the growing mass of health data in Europe. However, key stakeholders have identified aspects that demand clarification to ensure success. Data will need to be freed from traditional silos to flow more easily and to cross artificial borders. Wide engagement will be necessary among healthcare professionals, researchers, and the patients and citizens that stand to gain the most but whose trust must be won if they are to allow use or transfer of their data. This paper aims to alert the wider scientific community to the impact the ongoing discussions among lawmakers will have. Based on the literature and the consensus findings of an expert multistakeholder panel organised by the European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) in June 2022, it highlights the key issues at the intersection of science and policy, and the potential implications for health research for years, perhaps decades, to come.