Status of the national immunization technical advisory groups in the Americas: recommendations for improvement.

Objectives: To evaluate the structure and operation of national immunization technical advisory groups (NITAGs) in Latin America and the Caribbean and to make recommendations for improvement. Methods: A convenience sample of six current and eight former NITAG members representing 12 countries in the region were invited in 2022 to answer a web-based questionnaire on NITAG structure, organization, and procedures. The questionnaire used indicators similar to those in the Joint Reporting Form on Immunization. Participants were also asked about the role their NITAGs played in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) immunization policies. Results: Brazil, Dominican Republic, and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) reported not having an active NITAG. The nine active NITAGs are structured and organized according to World Health Organization and Pan American Health Organization recommendations, with variations between countries. Most NITAGs include representatives of the five recommended medical specialties with the participation of additional members possible. Only Bolivia (Plurinational State of) and Mexico have no explicit policy for managing members' potential conflicts of interest. All NITAGs have an exclusively technical advisory role and generally meet once a quarter. Usually, NITAGs are asked by health ministries to analyze issues and make recommendations. All NITAGs, except for Peru's, actively participated in supporting decision-making for immunization policy on COVID-19. Conclusions: NITAGs have successfully supported vaccine policy-making through evidence-based recommendations. However, improvement in their structure, operation, and transparency is needed to help them keep up with the rapidly evolving field of immunization. Research on the impact of NITAGs is important to support the development of recommendations for improvement.

Strategies for expanding childhood vaccination in the Americas following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: To provide an overview of the status of the childhood vaccination schedule in the Americas, outline program structures, and identify updated implementation strategies to improve vaccination coverage following the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A group of experts in pediatrics, epidemiology, vaccines, and global and public health discussed the current status of the childhood vaccination schedule in the Americas, describing the program structure and identifying new implementation strategies that have the potential to improve vaccination coverage in the post-pandemic context, after the challenges COVID-19 presented for more than two years. Results: The Americas currently face a high risk of resurgence of diseases that were previously controlled or eliminated. Therefore, it is important to find new strategies to educate citizens on the risks associated with lower vaccination rates, especially in children. Conclusions: New strategies along with strong mobilization of the population and advocacy by citizens are necessary to prevent antivaccination groups from gaining a stronger presence in the region and jeopardizing the credibility of the Expanded Program on Immunization.

Tiered Pricing and Alternative Mechanisms for Equitative Access to Vaccines in Latin America: A Narrative Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVES: To review and describe alternative strategies for the supply of vaccines in Latin America. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review to explore and describe alternatives for equitable vaccine access in Latin America. We searched and considered the main access strategies reported in the literature through PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. Additionally, we reviewed the web sites of key stakeholders. The search was conducted using the following keywords: ("access" or "availability" or "acquisition" or "affordability" or "tiered pricing") and ("vaccine"). Subsequently, documents that met the inclusion criteria were selected. Finally, findings were grouped by means of a thematic analysis and an interpretative synthesis. RESULTS: Twenty-four publications were included. We identified 5 main topics: current supply strategies, challenges for the acquisition of vaccines, vaccine prices equity, alternative supply strategies, and the advantages and impact of a tiered pricing strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests that tiered pricing can be an tool for accelerating the process of introducing vaccines in low-income countries at affordable prices and for countries that do not adhere to the current procurement mechanisms or are not eligible for Vaccine Alliance because giving countries prices for vaccines that reflect their ability to pay can result in better programmatic and financial planning for the purchase of these vaccines, and in return, vaccine manufacturers can gain access to wider markets However, this model has not been z improve access to vaccines that are aimed only at developing countries, mainly because the market in these countries is not profitable for producers.

Setting research priorities for global pandemic preparedness: An international consensus and comparison with ChatGPT's output.

Background: In this priority-setting exercise, we sought to identify leading research priorities needed for strengthening future pandemic preparedness and response across countries. Methods: The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to identify research priorities for future pandemic preparedness. Eighty experts in global health, translational and clinical research identified 163 research ideas, of which 42 experts then scored based on five pre-defined criteria. We calculated intermediate criterion-specific scores and overall research priority scores from the mean of individual scores for each research idea. We used a bootstrap (n = 1000) to compute the 95% confidence intervals. Results: Key priorities included strengthening health systems, rapid vaccine and treatment production, improving international cooperation, and enhancing surveillance efficiency. Other priorities included learning from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, managing supply chains, identifying planning gaps, and promoting equitable interventions. We compared this CHNRI-based outcome with the 14 research priorities generated and ranked by ChatGPT, encountering both striking similarities and clear differences. Conclusions: Priority setting processes based on human crowdsourcing - such as the CHNRI method - and the output provided by ChatGPT are both valuable, as they complement and strengthen each other. The priorities identified by ChatGPT were more grounded in theory, while those identified by CHNRI were guided by recent practical experiences. Addressing these priorities, along with improvements in health planning, equitable community-based interventions, and the capacity of primary health care, is vital for better pandemic preparedness and response in many settings.

Strategies for expanding childhood vaccination in the Americas following the COVID-19 pandemic / Estrategias para ampliar la vacunación infantil en la Región de las Américas después de la pandemia de COVID-19 / Estratégias para ampliar a vacinação infantil nas Américas depois da pandemia de COVID-19

ABSTRACT Objective. To provide an overview of the status of the childhood vaccination schedule in the Americas, outline program structures, and identify updated implementation strategies to improve vaccination coverage following the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. A group of experts in pediatrics, epidemiology, vaccines, and global and public health discussed the current status of the childhood vaccination schedule in the Americas, describing the program structure and identifying new implementation strategies that have the potential to improve vaccination coverage in the post-pandemic context, after the challenges COVID-19 presented for more than two years. Results. The Americas currently face a high risk of resurgence of diseases that were previously controlled or eliminated. Therefore, it is important to find new strategies to educate citizens on the risks associated with lower vaccination rates, especially in children. Conclusions. New strategies along with strong mobilization of the population and advocacy by citizens are necessary to prevent antivaccination groups from gaining a stronger presence in the region and jeopardizing the credibility of the Expanded Program on Immunization.

RESUMEN Objetivo. Presentar un panorama general de la situación del calendario de vacunación infantil en la Región de las Américas, describir la estructura de los programas y encontrar estrategias actualizadas para su ejecución a fin de mejorar la cobertura de vacunación después de la pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos. Un grupo de expertos en pediatría, epidemiología, vacunas y salud pública y mundial analizó la situación actual del calendario de vacunación infantil en la Región de las Américas, mediante la descripción de la estructura de los programas y la búsqueda de nuevas estrategias de ejecución capaces de mejorar la cobertura de vacunación en el contexto posterior a la pandemia de COVID-19, una vez superados los desafíos planteados por esta durante más de dos años. Resultados. En este momento, en la Región de las Américas hay un riesgo alto de reaparición de enfermedades previamente controladas o eliminadas. En consecuencia, es importante contar con nuevas estrategias para la educación de salud de la ciudadanía sobre los riesgos asociados a las tasas bajas de vacunación, especialmente en la población infantil. Conclusiones. Es necesario contar con nuevas estrategias, acompañadas de una fuerte movilización de la población y una promoción por parte de la ciudadanía, para evitar que los grupos que generan mensajes antivacunas aumenten su presencia en la Región y pongan en peligro la credibilidad del Programa Ampliado de Inmunización.

RESUMO Objetivo. Apresentar um panorama da situação do calendário de vacinação infantil nas Américas, definir a estrutura do programa e identificar estratégias de implementação atualizadas para melhorar a cobertura vacinal depois da pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos. Um grupo de especialistas em pediatria, epidemiologia, vacinas e saúde pública e global discutiu a situação atual do calendário de vacinação infantil nas Américas, descrevendo a estrutura dos programas e identificando novas estratégias de implementação que poderiam melhorar a cobertura vacinal no contexto pós-pandemia, na sequência dos desafios impostos pela COVID-19 durante mais de dois anos. Resultados. Atualmente, as Américas enfrentam um grande risco de ressurgimento de doenças já controladas ou eliminadas. Desse modo, é importante identificar novas estratégias para conscientizar os cidadãos sobre os riscos decorrentes da queda das taxas de vacinação, sobretudo em crianças. Conclusões. É necessário adotar novas estratégias, aliadas a uma forte mobilização da população e promoção da causa pelos cidadãos, a fim de impedir que os grupos antivacinas fortaleçam sua presença na região e coloquem em risco a credibilidade do Programa Ampliado de Imunização.

Health promotion and the agenda for sustainable development, WHO Region of the Americas

As abordagens e ferramentas de promoção da saúde podem ser úteis para grupos da sociedade civil, governos locais e nacionais e organizações multilaterais que estão trabalhando para operacionalizar a agenda de 2030 para o desenvolvimento sustentável. A promoção da saúde e o desenvolvimento sustentável compartilham várias prioridades centrais, como equidade, abordagens intersetoriais e sustentabilidade, que ajudam a maximizar seu impacto nas fronteiras setoriais tradicionais. Na Região das Américas, cada uma dessas prioridades tem forte ressonância devido às iniqüidades de saúde proeminentes e de longa data que se mostram resistentes a intervenções dirigidas exclusivamente pelo setor da saúde. Descrevemos vários casos da Região das Américas da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) nos quais as abordagens e ferramentas de promoção da saúde, com foco nas cidades, ambientes saudáveis e colaboração multissetorial, foram usadas para colocar a agenda em prática. Destacam-se as áreas em que tais abordagens e ferramentas podem ser aplicadas de forma eficaz e evidenciam o potencial transformador da promoção da saúde nos esforços para alcançar os objetivos de desenvolvimento sustentável.

Bases para el desarrollo e implementación de un modelo de información en salud de la mujer y perinatal orientado a la gestión en Latinoamérica / Foundations for the development and implementation of a women's and perinatal health information model for management in Latin America / Fundamentos do desenvolvimento e implementação de um modelo de informação em saúde da materna e perinatal orientado à gestão na América Latina

RESUMEN Objetivo El Sistema Informático Perinatal (SIP) ha marcado un hito en el uso de información sistematizada en la Región de las Américas. Lo que se ha aprendido ha contribuido al desarrollo de un modelo basado en un conjunto mínimo de indicadores (CMI). El objetivo del estudio fue describir el proceso histórico y metodológico de desarrollo, implementación y escalamiento territorial de un CMI para monitorizar y evaluar políticas, programas y servicios de salud de la mujer y perinatal orientado a la gestión (SIP-GESTIÓN). Métodos El estudio se llevó a cabo en dos etapas: 1) validación en cuatro fases de un CMI en una red de hospitales: a) construcción del modelo teórico de indicadores, b) implementación de la investigación operativa, c) selección final de indicadores, y d) definición de patrones de referencia, y 2) escalamiento territorial. Resultados Se identificaron 17 modelos de indicadores. El modelo inicial incluyó 177 indicadores agrupados en siete dimensiones (contexto, hábitos, accesibilidad, uso de servicios, calidad de cuidados, impacto materno-fetal, e impacto materno-neonatal) que se redujeron a 21 tras tres rondas Delphi. El modelo final (SIP-GESTIÓN) incluyó 40 indicadores. Se analizaron 240 021 partos (79,1%) de un total de 303 559 atendidos en las 122 maternidades seleccionadas en 24 Jurisdicciones (100%) de Argentina. La información se presenta a nivel nacional y desagregada por región sanitaria, provincia y hospital. Conclusiones Este modelo permitió alcanzar altos niveles de cobertura y calidad de la información y escalamiento territorial y es útil para la gestión, la investigación y la reorientación de programas y políticas.

ABSTRACT Objective The Perinatal Information System (SIP) represents a milestone in the use of systematized information in the Region of the Americas. What has been learned from the system has contributed to the development of a model based on a set of core indicators (SCI). The objective of the study was to describe the historical and methodological process involved in the development, implementation, and territorial scaling-up of an SCI to monitor and evaluate women's and perinatal health policies, programs, and services geared to management (SIP-GESTIÓN). Methods The study was conducted in two stages: 1) a four-phase validation of an SCI in a hospital network: a) construction of the theoretical indicator model, b) operations research, c) final selection of the indicators, and d) the definition of reference standards; and 2) territorial scaling-up. Results A total of 17 indicator models were identified. The initial model included 177 indicators divided into seven dimensions (context, habits, accessibility, use of services, quality of care, maternal and fetal impact, and maternal and neonatal impact), with 21 indicators remaining after three Delphi rounds. The final model (SIP-GESTIÓN), which included 40 indicators, was then used to study 240,021 (79.1%) of the 303,559 deliveries attended in 122 selected maternity facilities in 24 jurisdictions (100%) in Argentina. The information is presented in national terms and by health region, province, and hospital. Conclusions This model has made it possible to achieve high levels of information coverage and quality and territorial scaling-up and is useful for management, research, and the reorientation of programs and policies.

RESUMO Objetivo O Sistema de Informação Perinatal (SIP) é um marco no uso de informação sistematizada na Região das Américas. A experiência obtida contribuiu para o desenvolvimento de um modelo baseado em um conjunto mínimo de indicadores (CMI). O objetivo do estudo foi descrever o processo histórico e metodológico do desenvolvimento, implementação e dimensionamento territorial do CMI para monitorar e avaliar políticas, programas e serviços de saúde materna e perinatal orientado à gestão (SIP-gestão). Métodos O estudo foi realizado em duas etapas. A primeira etapa consistiu da validação em quatro fases de um CMI em uma rede de hospitais: a) construção do modelo teórico de indicadores, b) implementação da pesquisa operacional, c) seleção final dos indicadores e d) definição dos padrões de referência. A segunda etapa consistiu da determinação da escala territorial. Resultados Foram identificados 17 modelos de indicadores. O modelo inicial incluiu 177 indicadores agrupados em sete dimensões (contexto, hábitos, acessibilidade, utilização de serviços, qualidade do atendimento, impacto materno-fetal e impacto materno-neonatal) que foram reduzidas a 21 após três rodadas de aplicação da técnica Delphi. O modelo final (SIP-gestão) inclui 40 indicadores. Foram analisados 240.021 partos (79,1%) de um número total de 303.559 casos atendidos nas 122 maternidades selecionadas em 24 jurisdições (100%) da Argentina. Os dados são apresentados ao nível nacional e desagregados por região de saúde, província e hospital. Conclusões O modelo desenvolvido atingiu altos níveis de cobertura e qualidade da informação e determinação da escala territorial, e pode ser usado na gestão, pesquisa e reorientação de programas e políticas.

The new United Nations approach to sustainable development post-2015: Findings from four overviews of systematic reviews on interventions for sustainable development and health / El nuevo enfoque de las Naciones Unidas sobre el desarrollo sostenible después del 2015: Resultados de cuatro sinopsis de revisiones sistemáticas de intervenciones relacionadas con el desarrollo sostenible y la salud

ABSTRACT Objective To identify reported interventions that facilitate sustainable development and have had a positive impact on health in four areas: sustainable food production; sustainable energy use; sustainable jobs (“decent work”); and prevention of toxic exposure to chemicals. Methods Systematic review methods were used to synthesize evidence from multiple systematic reviews and economic evaluations. A comprehensive search was conducted of at least 14 databases and 8 websites for each of the four overviews, using pre-defined protocols, including clear inclusion criteria. To qualify as “sustainable,” interventions needed to aim (explicitly or implicitly) to positively impact at least two dimensions of the integrated framework for sustainable development and had to include measures of health impact. Results In total, 47 systematic reviews and 10 economic evaluations met the inclusion criteria. The most promising interventions, such as agricultural policies, were identified for each of the four topics. While the evidence for the interventions is not strong because of the limited number of studies, there is no evidence of a definite negative impact on health. The only possible exception is that of taxes and subsidies—though this intervention also has the potential to be pro-equity with higher relative impacts for lower income groups. Conclusions The evidence found for effective interventions is useful for guiding countries toward the best options for non-health sector interventions that can positively impact health. This overviews shows that intersectoral work benefits every sector involved.

RESUMEN Objetivo Identificar las intervenciones notificadas que facilitan el desarrollo sostenible y han tenido un impacto positivo en la salud en cuatro áreas: producción sostenible de alimentos, uso sostenible de la energía, trabajo sostenible (“trabajo digno”), y prevención de la exposición a productos químicos tóxicos. Métodos Se usaron métodos de revisión sistemática para sintetizar la evidencia de múltiples revisiones sistemáticas y evaluaciones económicas. Sobre la base de protocolos predefinidos, incluidos criterios de inclusión claros, se realizó una búsqueda en al menos 14 bases de datos y ocho sitios web para cada una de las cuatro sinopsis de revisiones sistemáticas. Para ser consideradas “sostenibles,” las intervenciones debían estar dirigidas (explícita o implícitamente) a lograr efectos positivos en al menos dos dimensiones del marco integrado para el desarrollo sostenible e incluir mediciones de la repercusión en la salud. Resultados En total, 47 revisiones sistemáticas y 10 evaluaciones económicas cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. Se identificaron las intervenciones más prometedoras, como las políticas agrícolas, para cada uno de los cuatro temas. Si bien la evidencia sobre las intervenciones no es sólida debido al número limitado de estudios, no hay indicios de un impacto negativo concreto en la salud. La única posible excepción se relaciona con los impuestos y subsidios, aunque esta intervención también tiene el potencial de favorecer la equidad con una repercusión relativa mayor en los grupos de menores ingresos. Conclusiones La evidencia sobre intervenciones eficaces es útil para guiar a los países hacia las mejores opciones de intervención en sectores que no son de salud pero cuya repercusión también será positiva en el de la salud. Estas sinopsis indican que el trabajo intersectorial beneficia a todos los sectores implicados.

Agendas de investigación priorizadas: un recurso estratégico para la salud en América Latina / Priority research agendas: a strategic resource for health in Latin America

OBJETIVO: Conocer y analizar los procedimientos de elaboración de las agendas nacionales de investigación integradas entre 2007 y 2011 en Argentina, Guatemala, México, Panamá y Paraguay. MÉTODOS: Estudio descriptivo y transversal utilizando una encuesta administrada vía internet a los participantes en la elaboración de las agendas, sobre los procesos de desarrollo, integración, instrumentación y utilización y difusión de la agenda. RESULTADOS: Los 45 participantes comunicaron haber seguido metodologías específicas para la construcción de las agendas y consideraron como buenos los aspectos organizativos en cuanto a la información previa aportada y el equilibrio entre las disciplinas y los actores clave. El 60% consideró imparciales a los coordinadores, aunque 25% señaló sesgos que favorecían algún tema. El 42% recibió apoyo técnico de consultores, lecturas y guías metodológicas. El 40% reportó haber realizado la priorización de temas. El 55% señaló haber constatado la diseminación y comunicación de la agenda, pero solo 22% comunicó la inclusión de temas de las agendas desarrolladas en convocatorias nacionales de investigación. CONCLUSIONES: El desarrollo de las agendas de investigación para la salud en los países estudiados se caracterizó por la planificación previa y la organización adecuada para lograr resultados consensuados. No obstante, las agendas no se utilizaron en las convocatorias nacionales, lo que refleja la falta de coordinación en los Sistemas Nacionales de Investigación para la Salud y la desconexión entre los financiadores y los investigadores. Se recomienda fortalecer el trabajo de integración y abogacía de actores clave para lograr modificar los procesos y estructuras de las convocatorias de investigación basadas en las agendas desarrolladas.

OBJECTIVE: Understand and analyze procedures used to create national integrated research agendas from 2007 to 2011 in Argentina, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, and Paraguay. METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study using an online survey of agenda preparation processes; specifically, development, integration, implementation, and use and dissemination of the agenda. RESULTS: The 45 respondents reported following specific methodologies for agenda construction and had a good opinion of organizational aspects with regard to prior information provided and balance among disciplines and stakeholders. Some 60% considered the coordinators impartial, although 25% mentioned biases favoring some subject; 42% received technical support from consultants, reading matter, and methodological guidelines; 40% engaged in subject-matter priority-setting; and 55% confirmed dissemination and communication of the agenda. However, only 22% reported inclusion of agenda topics in national calls for research proposals. CONCLUSIONS: In the countries studied, development of the health research agenda was characterized by prior planning and appropriate organization to achieve ­ consensus-based outcomes. Nevertheless, the agendas were not used in national calls for research proposals, reflecting lack of coordination in national health research systems and lack of connection between funders and researchers. It is recommended that stakeholders strengthen integration and advocacy efforts to modify processes and structures of agenda-based calls for research proposals.

Comparison of national health research priority-setting methods and characteristics in Latin America and the Caribbean, 2002 - 2012 / Comparación de los métodos de establecimiento de prioridades de investigación nacional de salud y sus características en América Latina y el Caribe, 2002 al 2012

OBJECTIVE: To compare health research priority-setting methods and characteristics among countries in Latin America and the Caribbean during 2002 - 2012. METHODS: This was a systematic review that identified national health research policies and priority agendas through a search of ministry and government databases related to health care institutions. PubMed, LILACS, the Health Research Web, and others were searched for the period from January 2002 - February 2012. The study excluded research organized by governmental institutions and specific national strategies on particular disease areas. Priority-setting methods were compared to the "nine common themes for good practice in health research priorities." National health research priorities were compared to those of the World Health Organization's Millennium Development Goals (MDG). RESULTS: Of the 18 Latin American countries assessed, 13 had documents that established national health research priorities; plus the Caribbean Health Research Council had a research agenda for its 19 constituents. These 14 total reports varied widely in terms of objectives, content, dissemination, and implementation; most provided a list of strategic areas, suggestions, and/or sub-priorities for each country; however, few proposed specific research topics and questions. CONCLUSIONS: Future reports could be improved by including more details on the comprehensive approach employed to identify priorities, on the information gathering process, and on practices to be undertaken after priorities are set. There is a need for improving the quality of the methodologies utilized and coordinating Regional efforts as countries strive to meet the MDG.

OBJETIVO: Comparar los métodos de establecimiento de prioridades de investigación de salud y sus características en los países de América Latina y el Caribe durante el período del 2002 al 2012. MÉTODOS: Se llevó a cabo una revisión sistemática que determinó las políticas nacionales de investigación de salud y los programas prioritarios mediante una búsqueda de bases de datos ministeriales y gubernamentales relacionadas con instituciones de atención de salud. Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda ajustada al período de enero del 2002 a febrero del 2012 en PubMed, LILACS, Health Research Web y otras fuentes. El estudio excluyó las investigaciones organizadas por instituciones gubernamentales y estrategias nacionales específicas sobre áreas de enfermedades particulares. Se compararon los métodos de establecimiento de prioridades con los "nueve temas comunes para unas prácticas adecuadas en materia de prioridades de investigación de salud". Se compararon las prioridades nacionales de investigación de salud con las de los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio (ODM) de la Organización Mundial de la Salud. RESULTADOS: De los 18 países latinoamericanos evaluados, 13 disponían de documentos que establecían las prioridades nacionales de investigación de salud; además, el Consejo del Caribe de Investigación de Salud disponía de un programa de investigaciones dirigido a sus 19 integrantes. Estos 14 informes variaban ampliamente en cuanto a objetivos, contenido, difusión y ejecución; la mayor parte de ellos proporcionaban una lista de áreas estratégicas, sugerencias o subprioridades para cada país, sin embargo, eran pocos los que proponían temas y cuestiones específicos de investigación. CONCLUSIONES: Se podrían mejorar los informes futuros mediante una descripción más detallada del método integral empleado para determinar las prioridades, del proceso de recopilación de información y de las prácticas que deben emprenderse una vez fijadas las prioridades. Es necesario mejorar la calidad de los métodos utilizados y coordinar las iniciativas regionales a medida que los países tratan de cumplir los ODM.

Sistemas nacionales de investigación para la salud en América Latina: una revisión de 14 países / National health research systems in Latin America: a 14-country review

En este artículo se discuten las principales características de los sistemas nacionales de investigación para la salud (SNIS) de Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay y Venezuela a partir de los documentos preparados por expertos de esos países que participaron en la Primera Conferencia Latinoamericana sobre Investigación e Innovación para la Salud, celebrada en abril de 2008 en Río de Janeiro, Brasil. Se revisaron también las fuentes citadas en los informes, artículos científicos publicados y opiniones de expertos, así como fuentes de información secundarias regionales. Seis países informaron poseer estructuras formales de gobernanza y gerencia de la investigación para la salud: en Brasil y Costa Rica, estas estructuras son lideradas por los ministerios de salud, mientras Argentina, Cuba, Ecuador y Venezuela tienen estructuras mixtas de sus ministerios de salud y de ciencia y tecnología. Brasil y Ecuador informaron poseer una política nacional dedicada e inclusiva de ciencia, tecnología e innovación para la salud. Argentina, Brasil, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú y Venezuela informaron haber establecido prioridades de investigación para la salud. Se concluye que a pesar de la heterogeneidad estructural y funcional de los SNIS de los países analizados y su desigual nivel de desarrollo, se han logrado avances alentadores. El establecimiento de una adecuada gobernanza/gerencia de los SNIS es de suma importancia para que los ministerios de salud, otros actores estatales y la sociedad civil puedan encausar eficazmente las investigaciones para la salud.

This article discusses the main features of the national health research systems (NHRS) of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela, based on documents prepared by their country experts who participated in the First Latin American Conference on Research and Innovation for Health held in April 2008, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The review also includes sources cited in the reports, published scientific papers, and expert opinion, as well as regional secondary sources. Six countries reported having formal entities for health research governance and management: Brazil and Costa Rica's entities are led by their ministries of health; while Argentina, Cuba, Ecuador, and Venezuela have entities shared by their ministries of health and ministries of science and technology. Brazil and Ecuador each reported having a comprehensive national policy devoted specifically to health science, technology, and innovation. Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela reported having established health research priorities. In conclusion, encouraging progress has been made, despite the structural and functional heterogeneity of the study countries' NHRS and their disparate levels of development. Instituting good NHRS governance/management is of utmost importance to how efficiently ministries of health, other government players, and society-at-large can tackle health research.