Analysis of the Health Product Profile Directory - a new tool to inform priority-setting in global public health.

BACKGROUND: The Health Product Profile Directory (HPPD) is an online database describing 8-10 key characteristics (such as target population, measures of efficacy and dosage) of product profiles for medicines, vaccines, diagnostics and other products that are intended to be accessed by populations in low- and middle-income countries. The HPPD was developed by TDR on behalf of WHO and launched on 15 May 2019. METHODS: The contents of the HPPD were downloaded into an Excel™ spreadsheet via the open access interface and analysed to identify the number of health product profiles by type, disease, year of publication, status, author organization and safety information. RESULTS: The HPPD contains summaries of 215 health product profiles published between 2008 and May 2019, 117 (54%) of which provide a hyperlink to the detailed publication from which the summary was extracted, and the remaining 98 provide an email contact for further information. A total of 55 target disease or health conditions are covered, with 210 profiles describing a product with an infectious disease as the target. Only 5 product profiles in the HPPD describe a product for a non-communicable disease. Four diseases account for 40% of product profiles in the HPPD; these are tuberculosis (33 profiles, 15%), malaria (31 profiles, 14%), HIV (13 profiles, 6%) and Chagas (10 profiles, 5%). CONCLUSION: The HPPD provides a new tool to inform priority-setting in global health - it includes all product profiles authored by WHO (n = 51). There is a need to standardise nomenclature to more clearly distinguish between strategic publications (describing research and development (R&D) priorities or preferred characteristics) compared to target product profiles to guide a specific candidate product undergoing R&D. It is recommended that all profiles published in the HPPD define more clearly what affordability means in the context where the product is intended to be used and all profiles should include a statement of safety. Combining the analysis from HPPD to a mapping of funds available for R&D and those products in the R&D pipeline would create a better overview of global health priorities and how they are supported. Such analysis and increased transparency should take us a step closer to measuring and improving coordination of efforts in global health R&D.

An analysis of research priority-setting at the World Health Organization - how mapping to a standard template allows for comparison between research priority-setting approaches.

BACKGROUND: A review of research priorities completed by WHO technical units was undertaken. Results of the mapping were recorded in a database that was used to generate analysis and compare research priorities and the different methodological approaches used in their development. METHODS: A total of 116 documents were reviewed for this study. The documents were published between 2002 and 2017 by the technical programmes of WHO headquarters and deposited in the institutional repository, IRIS. Research priorities were extracted from documents into a standard template and mapped to a five-category research cycle type framework defined in the WHO Strategy on Research for Health covering research to describe the research problem, identifying the cause and risk factors, developing solutions and new interventions, understanding the barriers to implementation, and evaluation of the impact of response. Details of the research priority methods were recorded. A database with user interface was created using Microsoft Excel 2010. RESULTS: A total of 2145 research priorities were extracted from the 116 documents meeting the inclusion criteria. The priorities specifically address 73 diseases/health topics. The document types were 26% Report, 22% WHO Guideline, 26% Research Prioritisation publication and 11% Meeting Notes. The most widely reported method used to identify priorities was expert consultation. Expert consultation was used to identify 86% of the priorities categorised here, with 26% (561) reporting it as the sole method; 52% (1111) explicitly listed a literature review as contributing to the identification of priorities. When the 2145 priorities were categorised across the research cycle framework, the largest portion (43%) addressed implementation challenges. The database is published here under an open access licence. CONCLUSION: Comparing research priorities between diseases/health topics requires standardisation and the research cycle type framework is one approach that can be applied across all the health topics found in public health. There is great variation in the use of research priority-setting methodology at WHO Headquarters. Therefore, a standard reporting approach, linked to established good practice, should be an area for future development by the WHO Global Health R&D Observatory. The database reported here can also be used to quickly access and analyse the research priorities for a specific health topic or to compare across a range of health topics.

Open access for operational research publications from low- and middle-income countries: who pays?

Open-access journal publications aim to ensure that new knowledge is widely disseminated and made freely accessible in a timely manner so that it can be used to improve people's health, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries. In this paper, we briefly explain the differences between closed- and open-access journals, including the evolving idea of the 'open-access spectrum'. We highlight the potential benefits of supporting open access for operational research, and discuss the conundrum and ways forward as regards who pays for open access.

Les articles de journaux en accès libre visent à assurer la dissémination large de nouvelles connaissances et de rendre leur accès libre de façon à pouvoir être utilisées rapidement pour améliorer la santé des populations, surtout dans les pays à revenu faible ou moyen. Dans cet article, nous expliquons briêvement les différences entre les publications à accès limité et à accès libre, notamment l'idée en gestation de « spectre d'accès libre ¼. Nous soulignons les bénéfices potentiels du soutien à l'accès libre pour la recherche opérationnelle et ensuite discutons la question de qui paye pour cet accès et la recherche de solutions.

El propósito de las publicaciones en las revistas de acceso libre es lograr una amplia difusión de los nuevos conocimientos mediante el acceso libre y oportuno, de manera que los avances se puedan aplicar a fin de mejorar la salud de las personas, sobre todo en los países de bajos y medianos ingresos. En el presente artículo se explican brevemente las diferencias entre las revistas de acceso libre y acceso restringido y se analiza además la idea evolutiva del 'espectro del acceso libre'. Se destacan las ventajas que puede ofrecer el respaldo al libre acceso a la investigación operativa y se analiza luego el dilema y las opciones que pueden permitir progresar con respecto a la fuente de financiamiento del libre acceso.