Healthcare workers' informal uses of mobile phones and other mobile devices to support their work: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers sometimes develop their own informal solutions to deliver services. One such solution is to use their personal mobile phones or other mobile devices in ways that are unregulated by their workplace. This can help them carry out their work when their workplace lacks functional formal communication and information systems, but it can also lead to new challenges. OBJECTIVES: To explore the views, experiences, and practices of healthcare workers, managers and other professionals working in healthcare services regarding their informal, innovative uses of mobile devices to support their work. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus on 11 August 2022 for studies published since 2008 in any language. We carried out citation searches and contacted study authors to clarify published information and seek unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with a qualitative component. We included studies that explored healthcare workers' views, experiences, and practices regarding mobile phones and other mobile devices, and that included data about healthcare workers' informal use of these devices for work purposes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using an extraction form designed for this synthesis, assessed methodological limitations using predefined criteria, and used a thematic synthesis approach to synthesise the data. We used the 'street-level bureaucrat' concept to apply a conceptual lens to our findings and prepare a line of argument that links these findings. We used the GRADE-CERQual approach to assess our confidence in the review findings and the line-of-argument statements. We collaborated with relevant stakeholders when defining the review scope, interpreting the findings, and developing implications for practice. MAIN RESULTS: We included 30 studies in the review, published between 2013 and 2022. The studies were from high-, middle- and low-income countries and covered a range of healthcare settings and healthcare worker cadres. Most described mobile phone use as opposed to other mobile devices, such as tablets. We have moderate to high confidence in the statements in the following line of argument. The healthcare workers in this review, like other 'street-level bureaucrats', face a gap between what is expected of them and the resources available to them. To plug this gap, healthcare workers develop their own strategies, including using their own mobile phones, data and airtime. They also use other personal resources, including their personal time when taking and making calls outside working hours, and their personal networks when contacting others for help and advice. In some settings, healthcare workers' personal phone use, although unregulated, has become a normal part of many work processes. Some healthcare workers therefore experience pressure or expectations from colleagues and managers to use their personal phones. Some also feel driven to use their phones at work and at home because of feelings of obligation towards their patients and colleagues. At best, healthcare workers' use of their personal phones, time and networks helps humanise healthcare. It allows healthcare workers to be more flexible, efficient and responsive to the needs of the patient. It can give patients access to individual healthcare workers rather than generic systems and can help patients keep their sensitive information out of the formal system. It also allows healthcare workers to communicate with each other in more personalised, socially appropriate ways than formal systems allow. All of this can strengthen healthcare workers' relationships with community members and colleagues. However, these informal approaches can also replicate existing social hierarchies and deepen existing inequities among healthcare workers. Personal phone use costs healthcare workers money. This is a particular problem for lower-level healthcare workers and healthcare workers in low-income settings as they are likely to be paid less and may have less access to work phones or compensation. Out-of-hours use may also be more of a burden for lower-level healthcare workers, as they may find it harder to ignore calls when they are at home. Healthcare workers with poor access to electricity and the internet are less able to use informal mobile phone solutions, while healthcare workers who lack skills and training in how to appraise unendorsed online information are likely to struggle to identify trustworthy information. Informal digital channels can help healthcare workers expand their networks. But healthcare workers who rely on personal networks to seek help and advice are at a disadvantage if these networks are weak. Healthcare workers' use of their personal resources can also lead to problems for patients and can benefit some patients more than others. For instance, when healthcare workers store and share patient information on their personal phones, the confidentiality of this information may be broken. In addition, healthcare workers may decide to use their personal resources on some types of patients, but not others. Healthcare workers sometimes describe using their personal phones and their personal time and networks to help patients and clients whom they assess as being particularly in need. These decisions are likely to reflect their own values and ideas, for instance about social equity and patient 'worthiness'. But these may not necessarily reflect the goals, ideals and regulations of the formal healthcare system. Finally, informal mobile phone use plugs gaps in the system but can also weaken the system. The storing and sharing of information on personal phones and through informal channels can represent a 'shadow IT' (information technology) system where information about patient flow, logistics, etc., is not recorded in the formal system. Healthcare workers may also be more distracted at work, for instance, by calls from colleagues and family members or by social media use. Such challenges may be particularly difficult for weak healthcare systems. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: By finding their own informal solutions to workplace challenges, healthcare workers can be more efficient and more responsive to the needs of patients, colleagues and themselves. But these solutions also have several drawbacks. Efforts to strengthen formal health systems should consider how to retain the benefits of informal solutions and reduce their negative effects.

Classification and focus comparison of health financing frameworks: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to review the current frameworks for understanding and assessing health financing and draw out the dimensions of conceptual frameworks. METHODS: This scoping review was conducted using the five stages of Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We reviewed all published peer-reviewed literature indexed in PubMed, SCOPUS, and Embase from 2000 up to 2021 for inclusion. RESULTS: We identified 21 frameworks developed to assess financing in the health system. We classified frameworks by grouping them into: frameworks focusing on health financing as a constituent of health system and frameworks focusing on health financing only. We classified health financing frameworks further into three main groups according to the general commonalities among them. These three groups are as follows: (1) frameworks providing general recommendations for improving health financing system regardless of sources of financing, (2) frameworks focusing on improving the performance of health insurance schemes, and (3) frameworks focusing on managing public health financing. CONCLUSION: Despite being diverse, various health financing frameworks offer synergistic views to the health financing system and provide a comprehensive picture of the health financing system. These frameworks can help policy makers decide which framework is more appropriate to start with based on their local contextual features and the changes they are going to bring about in their health financing system.

Mapping of national population-based surveys for better reporting of health-related indicators in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

BACKGROUND: Population-based surveys are the main data source to generate health-related indicators required to monitor progress toward national, regional and global goals effectively. Although the Eastern Mediterranean Region of World Health Organization (WHO) member states conduct many population-based surveys, they are not led regularly and fail to provide relevant indicators appropriately. Therefore, this study aims two-fold: to map out population-based surveys to be conducted data for the health-related indicators in the Region and propose a timetable for conducting national population-based surveys in the Region. METHODS: The study was conducted in six phases: 1) Selecting survey-based indicators; 2) Extracting and comparing relevant survey modules; 3) Identifying sources of data for the indicators; 4) Assessing countries' status in reporting on core health indicators; 5) Review and confirmation of the results by the experts. RESULTS: Population-based surveys are the sources of data for 44 (65%) out of 68 regional core health indicators and two (18%) out of 11 health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 3 indicators. The Health Examination Survey (HES) could cover 65% of the survey-based indicators. A total of 91% of survey-based indicators are obtained by a combination of HES, Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) and Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS). CONCLUSION: In order to effectively report health-related indicators, HES, DHS/MICS and GSHS are considered essential in national survey timetables. Each country needs to devise and implement a plan for population-based surveys by considering factors such as national health priorities, financial and human capacities, and previous experiences.

Global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from January 2020 to April 2022: A systematic review and meta-analysis of standardized population-based studies.

BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the global scale of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains incomplete: Routine surveillance data underestimate infection and cannot infer on population immunity; there is a predominance of asymptomatic infections, and uneven access to diagnostics. We meta-analyzed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies, standardized to those described in the World Health Organization's Unity protocol (WHO Unity) for general population seroepidemiological studies, to estimate the extent of population infection and seropositivity to the virus 2 years into the pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, preprints, and grey literature for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence published between January 1, 2020 and May 20, 2022. The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183634). We included general population cross-sectional and cohort studies meeting an assay quality threshold (90% sensitivity, 97% specificity; exceptions for humanitarian settings). We excluded studies with an unclear or closed population sample frame. Eligible studies-those aligned with the WHO Unity protocol-were extracted and critically appraised in duplicate, with risk of bias evaluated using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. We meta-analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, pooling to estimate regional and global seroprevalence over time; compared seroprevalence from infection to confirmed cases to estimate underascertainment; meta-analyzed differences in seroprevalence between demographic subgroups such as age and sex; and identified national factors associated with seroprevalence using meta-regression. We identified 513 full texts reporting 965 distinct seroprevalence studies (41% low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) sampling 5,346,069 participants between January 2020 and April 2022, including 459 low/moderate risk of bias studies with national/subnational scope in further analysis. By September 2021, global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from infection or vaccination was 59.2%, 95% CI [56.1% to 62.2%]. Overall seroprevalence rose steeply in 2021 due to infection in some regions (e.g., 26.6% [24.6 to 28.8] to 86.7% [84.6% to 88.5%] in Africa in December 2021) and vaccination and infection in others (e.g., 9.6% [8.3% to 11.0%] in June 2020 to 95.9% [92.6% to 97.8%] in December 2021, in European high-income countries [HICs]). After the emergence of Omicron in March 2022, infection-induced seroprevalence rose to 47.9% [41.0% to 54.9%] in Europe HIC and 33.7% [31.6% to 36.0%] in Americas HIC. In 2021 Quarter Three (July to September), median seroprevalence to cumulative incidence ratios ranged from around 2:1 in the Americas and Europe HICs to over 100:1 in Africa (LMICs). Children 0 to 9 years and adults 60+ were at lower risk of seropositivity than adults 20 to 29 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). In a multivariable model using prevaccination data, stringent public health and social measures were associated with lower seroprevalence (p = 0.02). The main limitations of our methodology include that some estimates were driven by certain countries or populations being overrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that global seroprevalence has risen considerably over time and with regional variation; however, over one-third of the global population are seronegative to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Our estimates of infections based on seroprevalence far exceed reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Quality and standardized seroprevalence studies are essential to inform COVID-19 response, particularly in resource-limited regions.

Survival analysis for patients with cancer in Gaza applying for Israeli permits to exit the Gaza Strip for health care: a retrospective cohort study of patients from 2008 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Gaza has been under land, sea, and aerial blockade for more than 13 years, during which time Israel has continued its permit regime to control access for Palestinian patients from Gaza to health facilities in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), Israel, and Jordan. Specific groups, such as patients with cancer, have a high need for permits owing to a lack of services in Gaza. The approval rate for patient permits to exit Gaza dropped from 94% in 2012 to 54% in 2017. We aimed to assess the effect of access restrictions due to permit denials or delays on all-cause mortality for patients with cancer from Gaza who were referred for chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both. METHODS: This study matched 17 072 permit applications for 3816 patients referred for chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both, from Jan 1, 2008, to Dec 31, 2017, with referral data for the same period and mortality data from Jan 1, 2008, to Jun 30, 2018. We stratified survival analysis by period of first application (2008-14, 2015-17), in light of varying access to Egypt during these times. Primary analysis compared survival of patients according to their first referral decision (approved versus denied or delayed) using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression. Consent for the study was granted by the Palestinian Ministry of Health, and ethical approval was granted by the Helsinki Committee of the Palestinian Ministry of Health. FINDINGS: Mortality was significantly higher among patients who were initially unsuccessful in permit applications from 2015 to 2017 (141 events over 493 person-years, corresponding to a rate of 286 per 100 person-years) than among patients who were initially successful in the same period (375 events over 1923 person-years, corresponding to a rate of 195 per 100 person-years) with a hazard ratio of 1·45 (95% CI 1·19-1·78, p=0.0009) after adjusting for age, sex, type of procedure, and type of cancer. There was no significant difference in mortality risk between the two groups in the 2008-14 period, with a hazard ratio of 0·84 (95% CI 0·69-1·01, p=0·071). INTERPRETATION: Barriers to patient access to health care through denied or delayed permit applications had a significant impact on mortality for patients with cancer who applied for chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both, in the period 2015-17. Relative ease of access through Rafah from 2008 to 2014 may have mitigated the health effects of access restrictions. FUNDING: WHO received funding from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation.

Data gaps towards health development goals, 47 low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the availability and gaps in data for measuring progress towards health-related sustainable development goals and other targets in selected low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We used 14 international population surveys to evaluate the health data systems in the 47 least developed countries over the years 2015-2020. We reviewed the survey instruments to determine whether they contained tools that could be used to measure 46 health-related indicators defined by the World Health Organization. We recorded the number of countries with data available on the indicators from these surveys. FINDINGS: Twenty-seven indicators were measurable by the surveys we identified. The two health emergency indicators were not measurable by current surveys. The percentage of countries that used surveys to collect data over 2015-2020 were lowest for tuberculosis (2/47; 4.3%), hepatitis B (3/47; 6.4%), human immunodeficiency virus (11/47; 23.4%), child development status and child abuse (both 13/47; 27.7%), compared with safe drinking water (37/47; 78.7%) and births attended by skilled health personnel (36/47; 76.6%). Nineteen countries collected data on 21 or more indicators over 2015-2020 while nine collected data on no indicators; over 2018-2020 these numbers reduced to six and 20, respectively. CONCLUSION: Examining selected international surveys provided a quick summary of health data available in the 47 least developed countries. We found major gaps in health data due to long survey cycles and lack of appropriate survey instruments. Novel indicators and survey instruments would be needed to track the fast-changing situation of health emergencies.

Influencing factors on the tendency of general practitioners to join in urban family physician program: a cross-sectional survey on Iranian physicians.

BACKGROUND: Urban family physician program (UFPP) is initiated as pilot by policy makers as a main reform in future of primary health care in Iran. Despite an ongoing pilot implementation of this program from 2012, it remains a main question about providing sufficient number of general practitioners (GPs). This study aimed to investigate the factors which affect GPs' decision to join in the UFPP. METHODS: In this national cross-sectional study a sample of 666 GPs, using convenience sampling, filled a self-report questionnaire. The multivariate logistic regression was applied to explore the demographic, practice and views determinants of the tendency of GPs to join in the UFPP. RESULTS: More than half of GPs (58.6%) participated in the study had a positive tendency to join in the UFPP. Older GPs (adjusted OR = 3.72; 95%CI 1.05-13.09), working in public sector (adjusted OR = 2.26; 95%CI 1.43-3.58), lower income level (adjusted OR = 6.69; 95%CI 2.95-15.16), higher economic expectations (adjusted OR = 2.08; 95%CI 1.19-3.63), and higher satisfaction from medicine profession (adjusted OR = 2.00; 95%CI 1.14-3.51) were the main factors which increased the GPs tendency to enter in UFPP. CONCLUSIONS: Decision for joining in the program is mainly affected by GPs' economic status. This clarifies that if the program can make them closer to their target income, they would be more likely to decide for joining in the program.

The experiences of merging health insurance funds in South Korea, Turkey, Thailand, and Indonesia: a cross-country comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Fragmentation in health insurance system may lead to inequity in financial access to and utilization of health care services. One possible option to overcome this challenge is merging the existing health insurance funds together. This article aims to review and compare the experience of South Korea, Turkey, Thailand and Indonesia regarding merging their health insurance funds. METHODS: This was a cross-country comparative study. The countries of the study were selected purposefully based on the availability of data to review their experience regarding merging health insurance funds. To find the most relevant documents about the subject, different sources of information including books, scientific papers, dissertations, reports, and policy documents were studied. Research databases including PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Science Direct and ProQuest were used to find relevant articles. Documents released by international organizations such as WHO and World Bank were analyzed as well. The content of documents was analyzed using a data-driven conventional content analysis approach and all details regarding the subject were extracted. The extracted information was reviewed by all authors several times and nine themes emerged. RESULTS: The findings show that improving equity in health financing and access to health care services among different groups of population was one of the main triggers to merge health insurance funds. Resistance by groups enjoying better benefit package and concerns of workers and employers about increasing the contribution rates were among challenges ahead of merging health insurance funds. Improving equity in the health care financing; reducing inequity in access to and utilization of health care services; boosting risk pooling; reducing administrative costs; higher chance to control total health care expenditures; and enhancing strategic purchasing were the main advantages of merging health insurance funds. The experience of these countries also emphasizes that political commitment and experiencing a reliable economic growth to enhance benefit package and support the single national insurance scheme financially after merging are required to facilitate implementation of merging health insurance funds. CONCLUSIONS: Other contributing health reforms should be implemented simultaneously or sequentially in both supply side and demand side of the health system if merging is going to pave the way reaching universal health coverage.

Iran health insurance system in transition: equity concerns and steps to achieve universal health coverage.

BACKGROUND: Equity, efficiency, sustainability, acceptability to clients and providers, and quality are the cornerstones of universal health coverage (UHC). No country has a single way to achieve efficient UHC. In this study, we documented the Iranian health insurance reforms, focusing on how and why certain policies were introduced and implemented, and which challenges remain to keep a sustainable UHC. METHODS: This retrospective policy analysis used three sources of data: a comprehensive and chronological scoping review of literature, interviews with Iran health insurance policy actors and stakeholders, and a review of published and unpublished official documents and local media. All data were analysed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Health insurance reforms, especially health transformation plan (HTP) in 2014, helped to progress towards UHC and health equity by expanding population coverage, a benefits package, and enhancing financial protection. However, several challenges can jeopardize sustaining this progress. There is a lack of suitable mechanisms to collect contributions from those without a regular income. The compulsory health insurance coverage law is not implemented in full. A substantial gap between private and public medical tariffs leads to high out-of-pocket health expenditure. Moreover, controlling the total health care expenditures is not the main priority to make keeping UHC more sustainable. CONCLUSION: To achieve UHC in Iran, the Ministry of Health and Medical Education and health insurance schemes should devise and follow the policies to control health care expenditures. Working mechanisms should be implemented to extend free health insurance coverage for those in need. More studies are needed to evaluate the impact of health insurance reforms in terms of health equity, sustainability, coverage, and access.

Transparency in public pharmaceutical sector: the key informants' perceptions from a developing country.

BACKGROUND: Policymaking in the pharmaceutical sector plays a pivotal role in achieving the health systems' goals. Transparency in the pharmaceutical policy could increase confidence in decision-making processes. This study aims to assess transparency in the public pharmaceutical sector of Iran. METHODS: This qualitative study with a content analysis approach was conducted in 2017 using the World Health Organization tool to explore pharmaceutical transparency. The perceptions of the various stakeholders of the health system through semi-structured interviews with a maximum variation of stakeholders were obtained in eight functions, including registration, licensing, inspection, promotion, clinical trials, selection, procurement, and distribution of medicines. RESULTS: There are some problems in two main categories: (1) General problems, including lack of transparency, conflict of interest, centralization, and monopoly. (2) Ethical problems include illegal payments, gifts, bribes, conflicts of interest, hidden power, hoarding, relationship-oriented behavior, medicine trafficking, and counterfeit medicine. Suggested solutions include evidence-based decision-making, the use of transparent and accountable processes, standardization, needs assessment, declaring a conflict of interest, skilled human resources, and tracking prescription. CONCLUSION: Despite the development of effective pharmaceutical policy in the health care system and government interventions for the control of the market, in some functions, reviewing the pharmaceutical policy is essential. Additionally, declaring a conflict of interest statement must be at the core of policy development to provide greater transparency.

Performance evaluation and ranking of regional primary health care and public health Systems in Iran.

BACKGROUND: The present study has been undertaken with the aim to evaluate performance and ranking of various universities of medical sciences that are responsible for providing public health services and primary health care in Iran. METHODS: Four models; Weighted Factor Analysis (WFA), Equal Weighting (EW), Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA), and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) have been applied for evaluating the performance of universities of medical sciences. This study was commenced based on the statistical reports of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME), census data from the Statistical Center of Iran, indicators of Vital Statistics, results of Multiple Indicator of Demographic and Health Survey 2010, and results of the National Survey of Risk Factors of non-communicable diseases. RESULTS: The average performance scores in WFA, EW, SFA, and DEA methods for the universities were 0.611, 0.663, 0.736 and 0.838, respectively. In all 4 models, the performance scores of universities were different (range from 0.56-1, 0.53-1, 0.73-1 and 0.83-1 in WFA, EW, SFA and DEA models, respectively). Gilan and Rafsanjan universities with the average ranking score of 4.75 and 41 had the highest and lowest rank among universities, respectively. The universities of Gilan, Ardabil and Bojnourd in all four models had the highest performance among the top 15 universities, while the universities of Rafsanjan, Ahvaz, Kerman and Jiroft showed poor performance in all models. CONCLUSIONS: The average performance scores have varied based on different measurement methods, so judging the performance of universities based solely on the results of a model can be misleading. In all models, the performance of universities has been different, which indicates the need for planning to balance the performance improvement of universities based on learning from the experiences of well-performing universities.

Iran in transition.

Being the second-largest country in the Middle East, Iran has a long history of civilisation during which several dynasties have been overthrown and established and health-related structures have been reorganised. Iran has had the replacement of traditional practices with modern medical treatments, emergence of multiple pioneer scientists and physicians with great contributions to the advancement of science, environmental and ecological changes in addition to large-scale natural disasters, epidemics of multiple communicable diseases, and the shift towards non-communicable diseases in recent decades. Given the lessons learnt from political instabilities in the past centuries and the approaches undertaken to overcome health challenges at the time, Iran has emerged as it is today. Iran is now a country with a population exceeding 80 million, mainly inhabiting urban regions, and has an increasing burden of non-communicable diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, malignancies, mental disorders, substance abuse, and road injuries.

Setting health care services tariffs in Iran: half a century quest for a window of opportunity.

BACKGROUND: The process of medical tariffs setting in Iran remains to be a contentious issue and is heavily criticized by many stakeholders. This paper explores the experience of setting health care services tariffs in the Iranian health care system over the last five decades. METHODS: We analyzed data collected through literature review and reviews of the official documents developed at the various levels of the Iranian health system using inductive and deductive content analysis. Twenty-two face-to-face semi-structured interviews supplemented the analysis. Data were analysed and interpreted using 'policy triangle' and 'garbage can' models. RESULTS: Our comprehensive review of changes in the medical tariff setting provides valuable lessons for major stakeholders. Most changes were implemented in a sporadic, inadequate, and a non-evidence-based manner. Disparities in tariffs between public and private sectors continue to exist. Lack of clarity in tariffs setting mechanisms and its process makes negotiations between various stakeholders difficult and can potentially become a source of a corrupt income. Such clarity can be achieved by using fair and technically sound tariffs. Technical aspects of tariff setting should be separated from the political negotiations over the overall payment to the medical professionals. Transparency regarding a conflict of interest and establishing punitive measures against those violating the rules could help improving trust in the doctor-patient relationship. CONCLUSION: Use of evidence-informed models and methods in medical tariff setting could help to strike the right balance in the process of health care services provision to address health system objectives. A sensitive application of policy models can offer significant insights into the nature of medical tariff setting and highlight existing constraints and opportunities. This study generates lessons learned in tariffs setting, particularly for low- and middle-income countries.

What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of merging health insurance funds? A qualitative policy analysis from Iran.

BACKGROUND: In countries with health insurance systems, the number and size of insurance funds along with the amount of risk distribution among them are a major concern. One possible solution to overcome problems resulting from fragmentation is to combine risk pools to create a single pool. This study aimed to investigate the potential advantages and disadvantages of merging health insurance funds in Iran. METHODS: In this qualitative study, a purposeful sampling with maximum variation was used to obtain representativeness and rich data. To this end, sixty-seven face-to-face interviews were conducted. Moreover, a documentary review was used as a supplementary source of data collection. Content analysis using the 'framework method' was used to analyze the data. Four trustworthiness criteria, including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability, were used to assure the quality of results. RESULTS: The potential consequences were grouped into seven categories, including stewardship, financing, population, benefit package, structure, operational procedures, and interaction with providers. According to the interviewees, controlling total health care expenditures; improving strategic purchasing; removing duplication in population coverage; centralizing the profile of providers in a single database; controlling the volume of provided health care services; making hospitals interact with single insurance with a single set of instructions for contracting, claiming review, and reimbursement; and reducing administrative costs were among the main benefits of merging health insurance funds. The interviewees enumerated the following drawbacks as well: the social security organization's unwillingness to collect insurance premiums from private workers actively as before; increased dissatisfaction among population groups enjoying a generous basic benefits package; risk of financial fraud and corruption due to gathering all premiums in a single bank; and risk of putting more financial pressure on providers in case of delay in reimbursement with a single-payer system. CONCLUSION: Merging health insurance schemes in Iran is influenced by a wide range of potential merits and drawbacks. Thus, to facilitate the process and lessen opponents' objection, policy makers should act as brokers by taking into account contextual factors and adopting tailored policies to respectively maximize and minimize the potential benefits and drawbacks of consolidation in Iran.

Health insurance benefit package in Iran: a qualitative policy process analysis.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient transparency in prioritization of health services, multiple health insurance organizations with various and not-aligned policies, plus limited resources to provide comprehensive health coverage are among the challenges to design appropriate Health Insurance Benefit Package (HIBP) in Iran. This study aims to analyze Policy Process of Health Insurance Benefit Package in Iran. METHOD: Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts, plus document analysis and observation, from February 2014 until October 2016. Using both deductive and inductive approaches, two independent researchers conducted data content analysis. We used MAXQDA.11 software for data management. RESULTS: We identified 10 main themes, plus 81 sub-themes related to development and implementation of HIBP. These included: lack of transparent criteria for inclusion of services within HIBP, inadequate use of scientific evidence to determine the HIBP, lack of evaluation systems, and weak decision-making process. We propose 11 solutions and 25 policy options to improve the situation. CONCLUSION: The design and implementation of HIBP did not follow an evidence-based and logical algorithm in Iran. Rather, political and financial influences at the macro level determined the decisions. This is rooted in social, cultural, and economic norms in the country, whereby political and economic factors had the greatest impact on the implementation of HIBP. To define a cost-effective HIBP in Iran, it is pivotal to develop transparent and evidence-based guidelines about the processes and the stewardship of HIBP, which are in line with upstream policies and societal characteristics. In addition, the possible conflict of interests and its harms should be minimized in advance.

Correction to: Combining health insurance funds in a fragmented context: what kind of challenges should be considered?

In the original publication of this article [1], there are two corrections.

Combining health insurance funds in a fragmented context: what kind of challenges should be considered?

BACKGROUND: Iran's Parliament passed a Law in 2010 to merge the existing health insurance schemes to boost risk pooling. Merging can be challenging as there are differences among health insurance schemes in various aspects. This qualitative prospective policy analysis aims to reveal key challenges and implementation barriers of the policy as introduced in Iran. METHODS: A qualitative study of key informants and documentary review was conducted. Sixty-seven semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted, with key informants from relevant stakeholders. Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used for selecting the interviewees. The related policy documents were also reviewed and analyzed to supplement interviews. Data analysis was conducted through an existing health financing World Bank framework. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that for combining health insurance funds, operational challenges in the following areas should be taken into account: financing mechanisms, population coverage, benefits package, provider engagement, organizational structure, health service delivery and operational processes. It is also important to have adequate cogent reasons to "the justification of the consolidation process" in the given context. When moving towards combining health insurance funds, especially in countries with a purchaser-provider split, it is critical for policy makers to make sure that the health insurance system is aligned with the policies and Stewardship of the broader health care system. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of major reforms in a health system with fragmented insurance schemes with different target populations, prepayment structures, benefit packages and history of development is inherently difficult, especially when different stakeholders have vetoing powers over the proposed reforms. Solving the differences and operational challenges in the main areas of health insurance system generated in this study may provide a platform for the designing and implementing merging process of social health insurance schemes in Iran and other countries with similar situations.

Is female genital mutilation associated with eclampsia? Evidence from a nationally representative survey data.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown the impact of female genital mutilation (FGM), especially infibulation (WHO type III), on reproductive health, and adverse obstetric outcomes like postpartum haemorrhage and obstructed labour. However, whether an association exists with maternal hypertensive complication is not known. The present study sought to investigate the role of the different types of FGM on the occurrence of eclampsia. METHODS: The study used data from the 2006 Demographic and health survey of Mali. The proportion of eclampsia in women with each type of FGM and the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (OR) were calculated, using women without FGM as reference group. Unadjusted and adjusted OR were also calculated for women who underwent infibulation compared to the rest of the population under study (women without FGM and women with FGM type I, II, and IV). RESULTS: In the 3997 women included, the prevalence of infibulation was 10.2% (n = 407) while 331 women did not report FGM (8.3%). The proportion of women reporting signs and symptoms suggestive of eclampsia was 5.9% (n = 234). Compared with the absence of female genital mutilation and adjusted for covariates, infibulation was associated with eclampsia (aOR 2.5; 95% CI:1.4-4.6), while the association was not significant in women with other categories of FGM. A similar aOR was found when comparing women with infibulation with the pooled sample of women without FGM and women with the other forms of FGM. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests a possible association between infibulation and eclampsia. Future studies could investigate this association in other settings. If these findings are confirmed, the possible biological mechanisms and preventive strategies should be investigated.

Framework for Managing the COVID-19 Infodemic: Methods and Results of an Online, Crowdsourced WHO Technical Consultation.

BACKGROUND: An infodemic is an overabundance of information-some accurate and some not-that occurs during an epidemic. In a similar manner to an epidemic, it spreads between humans via digital and physical information systems. It makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it. OBJECTIVE: A World Health Organization (WHO) technical consultation on responding to the infodemic related to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic was held, entirely online, to crowdsource suggested actions for a framework for infodemic management. METHODS: A group of policy makers, public health professionals, researchers, students, and other concerned stakeholders was joined by representatives of the media, social media platforms, various private sector organizations, and civil society to suggest and discuss actions for all parts of society, and multiple related professional and scientific disciplines, methods, and technologies. A total of 594 ideas for actions were crowdsourced online during the discussions and consolidated into suggestions for an infodemic management framework. RESULTS: The analysis team distilled the suggestions into a set of 50 proposed actions for a framework for managing infodemics in health emergencies. The consultation revealed six policy implications to consider. First, interventions and messages must be based on science and evidence, and must reach citizens and enable them to make informed decisions on how to protect themselves and their communities in a health emergency. Second, knowledge should be translated into actionable behavior-change messages, presented in ways that are understood by and accessible to all individuals in all parts of all societies. Third, governments should reach out to key communities to ensure their concerns and information needs are understood, tailoring advice and messages to address the audiences they represent. Fourth, to strengthen the analysis and amplification of information impact, strategic partnerships should be formed across all sectors, including but not limited to the social media and technology sectors, academia, and civil society. Fifth, health authorities should ensure that these actions are informed by reliable information that helps them understand the circulating narratives and changes in the flow of information, questions, and misinformation in communities. Sixth, following experiences to date in responding to the COVID-19 infodemic and the lessons from other disease outbreaks, infodemic management approaches should be further developed to support preparedness and response, and to inform risk mitigation, and be enhanced through data science and sociobehavioral and other research. CONCLUSIONS: The first version of this framework proposes five action areas in which WHO Member States and actors within society can apply, according to their mandate, an infodemic management approach adapted to national contexts and practices. Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and the related infodemic require swift, regular, systematic, and coordinated action from multiple sectors of society and government. It remains crucial that we promote trusted information and fight misinformation, thereby helping save lives.