Building consensus on common features and interoperability use cases for community health information systems: a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Information systems for community health have become increasingly sophisticated and evidence-based in the last decade and they are now the most widely used health information systems in many low-income and middle-income countries. This study aimed to establish consensus regarding key features and interoperability priorities for community health information systems (CHISs). METHODS: A Delphi study was conducted among a systematically selected panel of CHIS experts. This impressive pool of experts represented a range of leading global health institutions, with gender and regional balance as well as diversity in their areas of expertise. Through five rounds of iterative surveys and follow-up interviews, the experts established a high degree of consensus. We supplemented the Delphi study findings with a series of focus group discussions with 10 community health worker (CHW) leaders. RESULTS: CHISs today are expected to adapt to a wide range of local contextual requirements and to support and improve care delivery. While once associated with a single role type (CHWs), these systems are now expected to engage other end users, including patients, supervisors, clinicians and data managers. Of 30 WHO-classified digital health interventions for care providers, experts identified 23 (77%) as being important for CHISs. Case management and care coordination features accounted for more than one-third (14 of 37, 38%) of the core features expected of CHISs today, a higher proportion than any other category. The highest priority use cases for interoperability include CHIS to health management information system monthly reporting and CHIS to electronic medical record referrals. CONCLUSION: CHISs today are expected to be feature-rich, to support a range of user roles in community health systems, and to be highly adaptable to local contextual requirements. Future interoperability efforts, such as CHISs in general, are expected not only to move data efficiently but to strengthen community health systems in ways that measurably improve care.

Community health worker perspectives on advocacy: design-based research to develop a digital advocacy training course.

Introduction: While community health workers (CHWs) are well-positioned as health advocates, they frequently lack support and feel undervalued. Advocacy training may prepare CHWs to support communities better. Methods: This study uses a design-based research approach to (1) explore how participation in curriculum-development workshops for a digital advocacy course influenced CHWs' (n = 25) perceptions of advocacy and (2) describe how CHW involvement shaped course development. Data were collected via five discussion groups and seven surveys over six months. Results: Initially, the CHWs perceived themselves as community-advocates but not as self-advocates. They increasingly reflected on the merits of advocating for better working conditions and aspired to greater involvement in decision-making. CHWs reflected positively on their advisory role in shaping the course to improve content acceptability and validity. Discussion: Training efforts to engage CHWs in advocacy must overcome systemic barriers and norms internalized by CHWs that deter them from reaching their full potential as advocates.

Labour conditions in dual-cadre community health worker programmes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Health care delivered by community health workers reduces morbidity and mortality while providing a considerable return on investment. Despite growing consensus that community health workers, a predominantly female workforce, should receive a salary, many community health worker programmes take the form of dual-cadre systems, where a salaried cadre of community health workers works alongside a cadre of unsalaried community health workers. We aimed to determine the presence, prevalence, and magnitude of exploitation in national dual-cadre programmes. METHODS: We did a systematic review of available evidence from peer-reviewed databases and grey literature from database inception to Aug 2, 2021, for studies on unsalaried community health worker cadres in dual-cadre systems. Editorials, protocols, guidelines, or conference reports were excluded in addition to studies about single-tier community health worker programmes and those reporting on only salaried cadres of community health workers in a dual-cadre system. We extracted data on remuneration, workload, task complexity, and self-reported experiences of community health workers. Three models were created: a minimum model with the shortest time and frequency per task documented in the literature, a maximum model with the longest time, and a median model. Labour exploitation was defined as being engaged in work below the country's minimum wage together with excessive work hours or complex tasks. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271500. FINDINGS: We included 117 reports from 112 studies describing community health workers in dual-cadre programmes across 19 countries. The majority of community health workers were female. 13 (59%) of 22 unsalaried community health worker cadres and one (10%) of ten salaried cadres experienced labour exploitation. Three (17%) of 18 unsalaried community health workers would need to work more than 40 h per week to fulfil their assigned responsibilities. Unsalaried community health worker cadres frequently reported non-payment, inadequate or inconsistent payment of incentives, and an overburdensome workload. INTERPRETATION: Unsalaried community health workers in dual-cadre programmes often face labour exploitation, potentially leading to inadequate health-care provision. Labour laws must be upheld and the creation of professional community health worker cadres with fair contracts prioritised, international funding allocated to programmes that rely on unsalaried workers should be transparently reported, the workloads of community health workers should be modelled a priori and actual time use routinely assessed, community health workers should have input in policies that affect them, and volunteers should not be responsible for the delivery of essential health services. FUNDING: None.

Comparing two data collection methods to track vital events in maternal and child health via community health workers in rural Nepal.

BACKGROUND: Timely tracking of health outcomes is difficult in low- and middle-income countries without comprehensive vital registration systems. Community health workers (CHWs) are increasingly collecting vital events data while delivering routine care in low-resource settings. It is necessary, however, to assess whether routine programmatic data collected by CHWs are sufficiently reliable for timely monitoring and evaluation of health interventions. To study this, we assessed the consistency of vital events data recorded by CHWs using two methodologies-routine data collected while delivering an integrated maternal and child health intervention, and data from a birth history census approach at the same site in rural Nepal. METHODS: We linked individual records from routine programmatic data from June 2017 to May 2018 with those from census data, both collected by CHWs at the same site using a mobile platform. We categorized each vital event over a one-year period as 'recorded by both methods,' 'census alone,' or 'programmatic alone.' We further assessed whether vital events data recorded by both methods were classified consistently. RESULTS: From June 2017 to May 2018, we identified a total of 713 unique births collectively from the census (birth history) and programmatic maternal 'post-delivery' data. Three-fourths of these births (n = 526) were identified by both. There was high consistency in birth location classification among the 526 births identified by both methods. Upon including additional programmatic 'child registry' data, we identified 746 total births, of which 572 births were identified by both census and programmatic methods. Programmatic data (maternal 'post-delivery' and 'child registry' combined) captured more births than census data (723 vs. 595). Both methods consistently classified most infants as 'living,' while infant deaths and stillbirths were largely classified inconsistently or recorded by only one method. Programmatic data identified five infant deaths and five stillbirths not recorded in census data. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that data collected by CHWs from routinely tracking pregnancies, births, and deaths are promising for timely program monitoring and evaluation. Despite some limitations, programmatic data may be more sensitive in detecting vital events than cross-sectional census surveys asking women to recall these events.

Stock-outs of essential medicines among community health workers (CHWs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): a systematic literature review of the extent, reasons, and consequences.

BACKGROUND: This paper explores the extent of community-level stock-out of essential medicines among community health workers (CHWs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and identifies the reasons for and consequences of essential medicine stock-outs. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five electronic databases were searched with a prespecified strategy and the grey literature examined, January 2006-March 2021. Papers containing information on (1) the percentage of CHWs stocked out or (2) reasons for stock-outs along the supply chain and consequences of stock-out were included and appraised for risk of bias. Outcomes were quantitative data on the extent of stock-out, summarized using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data regarding reasons for and consequences of stock-outs, analyzed using thematic content analysis and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Two reviewers screened 1083 records; 78 evaluations were included. Over the last 15 years, CHWs experienced stock-outs of essential medicines nearly one third of the time and at a significantly (p < 0.01) higher rate than the health centers to which they are affiliated (28.93% [CI 95%: 28.79-29.07] vs 9.17% [CI 95%: 8.64-9.70], respectively). A comparison of the period 2006-2015 and 2016-2021 showed a significant (p < 0.01) increase in CHW stock-out level from 26.36% [CI 95%: 26.22-26.50] to 48.65% [CI 95%: 48.02-49.28] while that of health centers increased from 7.79% [95% CI 7.16-8.42] to 14.28% [95% CI 11.22-17.34]. Distribution barriers were the most cited reasons for stock-outs. Ultimately, patients were the most affected: stock-outs resulted in out-of-pocket expenses to buy unavailable medicines, poor adherence to medicine regimes, dissatisfaction, and low service utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Community-level stock-out of essential medicines constitutes a serious threat to achieving universal health coverage and equitable improvement of health outcomes. This paper suggests stock-outs are getting worse, and that there are particular barriers at the last mile. There is an urgent need to address the health and non-health system constraints that prevent the essential medicines procured for LMICs by international and national stakeholders from reaching the people who need them the most.

Continuity of community-based healthcare provision during COVID-19: a multicountry interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pandemics often precipitate declines in essential health service utilisation, which can ultimately kill more people than the disease outbreak itself. There is some evidence, however, that the presence of adequately supported community health workers (CHWs), that is, financially remunerated, trained, supplied and supervised in line with WHO guidelines, may blunt the impact of health system shocks. Yet, adequate support for CHWs is often missing or uneven across countries. This study assesses whether adequately supported CHWs can maintain the continuity of essential community-based health service provision during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Interrupted time series analysis. Monthly routine data from 27 districts across four countries in sub-Saharan Africa were extracted from CHW and facility reports for the period January 2018-June 2021. Descriptive analysis, null hypothesis testing, and segmented regression analysis were used to assess the presence and magnitude of a possible disruption in care utilisation after the earliest reported cases of COVID-19. RESULTS: CHWs across all sites were supported in line with the WHO Guideline and received COVID-19 adapted protocols, training and personal protective equipment within 45 days after the first case in each country. We found no disruptions to the coverage of proactive household visits or integrated community case management (iCCM) assessments provided by these prepared and protected CHWs, as well as no disruptions to the speed with which iCCM was received, pregnancies were registered or postnatal care received. CONCLUSION: CHWs who were equipped and prepared for the pandemic were able to maintain speed and coverage of community-delivered care during the pandemic period. Given that the majority of CHWs globally remain unpaid and largely unsupported, this paper suggests that the opportunity cost of not professionalising CHWs may be larger than previously estimated, particularly in light of the inevitability of future pandemics.

Lessons from an eight-country community health data harmonization collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) are individuals who are trained and equipped to provide essential health services to their neighbors and have increased access to healthcare in communities worldwide for more than a century. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) Guideline on Health Policy and System Support to Optimize Community Health Worker Programmes reveals important gaps in the evidentiary certainty about which health system design practices lead to quality care. Routine data collection across countries represents an important, yet often untapped, opportunity for exploratory data analysis and comparative implementation science. However, epidemiological indicators must be harmonized and data pooled to better leverage and learn from routine data collection. METHODS: This article describes a data harmonization and pooling Collaborative led by the organizations of the Community Health Impact Coalition, a network of health practitioners delivering community-based healthcare in dozens of countries across four WHO regions. OBJECTIVES: The goals of the Collaborative project are to; (i) enable new opportunities for cross-site learning; (ii) use positive and negative outlier analysis to identify, test, and (if helpful) propagate design practices that lead to quality care; and (iii) create a multi-country 'brain trust' to reinforce data and health information systems across sites. RESULTS: This article outlines the rationale and methods used to establish a data harmonization and pooling Collaborative, early findings, lessons learned, and directions for future research.

Community health workers at the dawn of a new era: 11. CHWs leading the way to "Health for All".

BACKGROUND: This is the concluding paper of our 11-paper supplement, "Community health workers at the dawn of a new era". METHODS: We relied on our collective experience, an extensive body of literature about community health workers (CHWs), and the other papers in this supplement to identify the most pressing challenges facing CHW programmes and approaches for strengthening CHW programmes. RESULTS: CHWs are increasingly being recognized as a critical resource for achieving national and global health goals. These goals include achieving the health-related Sustainable Development Goals of Universal Health Coverage, ending preventable child and maternal deaths, and making a major contribution to the control of HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, and noncommunicable diseases. CHWs can also play a critical role in responding to current and future pandemics. For these reasons, we argue that CHWs are now at the dawn of a new era. While CHW programmes have long been an underfunded afterthought, they are now front and centre as the emerging foundation of health systems. Despite this increased attention, CHW programmes continue to face the same pressing challenges: inadequate financing, lack of supplies and commodities, low compensation of CHWs, and inadequate supervision. We outline approaches for strengthening CHW programmes, arguing that their enormous potential will only be realized when investment and health system support matches rhetoric. Rigorous monitoring, evaluation, and implementation research are also needed to enable CHW programmes to continuously improve their quality and effectiveness. CONCLUSION: A marked increase in sustainable funding for CHW programmes is needed, and this will require increased domestic political support for prioritizing CHW programmes as economies grow and additional health-related funding becomes available. The paradigm shift called for here will be an important step in accelerating progress in achieving current global health goals and in reaching the goal of Health for All.

Community health workers at the dawn of a new era: 10. Programme performance and its assessment.

BACKGROUND: While the evidence supporting the effectiveness of community health worker (CHW) programmes is substantial, there is also considerable evidence that many of these programmes have notable weaknesses that need to be addressed in order for them to reach their full potential. Thus, considerations about CHW programme performance and its assessment must be taken into account as the importance of these programmes is becoming more widely appreciated. In this paper, the tenth in our 11-paper series, "Community health workers at the dawn of a new era", we address CHW programme performance and how it is assessed from a systems perspective. METHODS: The paper builds on the 2014 CHW Reference Guide, a compendium of case studies of 29 national CHW programmes, the 2018 WHO guideline on health policy and system support to optimize CHW programmes, and scientific studies on CHW programme performance published in the past 5 years. RESULTS: The paper provides an overview of existing frameworks that are useful for assessing the performance of CHW programmes, with a specific focus on how individual CHW performance and community-level outcomes can be measured. The paper also reviews approaches that have been taken to assess CHW programme performance, from programme monitoring using the routine health information system to national assessments using quantitative and/or qualitative study designs and assessment checklists. The paper also discusses contextual factors that influence CHW programme performance, and reflects upon gaps and needs for the future with regard to assessment of CHW programme performance. CONCLUSION: Assessments of CHW programme performance can have various approaches and foci according to the programme and its context. Given the fact that CHW programmes are complex entities and part of health systems, their assessment ideally needs to be based on data derived from a mix of reliable sources. Assessments should be focused not only on effectiveness (what works) but also on contextual factors and enablers (how, for whom, under what circumstances). Investment in performance assessment is instrumental for continually innovating, upgrading, and improving CHW programmes at scale. Now is the time for new efforts in implementation research for strengthening CHW programming.

Compensation models for community health workers: Comparison of legal frameworks across five countries.

BACKGROUND: Despite the life-saving work they perform, community health workers (CHWs) have long been subject to global debate about their remuneration. There is now, however, an emerging consensus that CHWs should be paid. As the discussion evolves from whether to financially remunerate CHWs to how to do so, there is an urgent need to better understand the types of CHW payment models and their implications. METHODS: This study examines the legal framework on CHW compensation in five countries: Brazil, Ghana, Nigeria, Rwanda, and South Africa. In order to map the characteristics of each approach, a review of the regulatory framework governing CHW compensation in each country was undertaken. Law firms in each of the five countries were engaged to support the identification and interpretation of relevant legal documents. To guide the search and aid in the creation of uniform country profiles, a standardized set of questions was developed, covering: (i) legal requirements for CHW compensation, (ii) CHW compensation mechanisms, and (iii) CHW legal protections and benefits. RESULTS: The five countries profiled represent possible archetypes for CHW compensation: Brazil (public), Ghana (volunteer-based), Nigeria (private), Rwanda (cooperatives with performance based incentives) and South Africa (hybrid public/private). Advantages and disadvantages of each model with respect to (i) CHWs, in terms of financial protection, and (ii) the health system, in terms of ease of implementation, are outlined. CONCLUSIONS: While a strong legal framework does not necessarily translate into high-quality implementation of compensation practices, it is the first necessary step. Certain approaches to CHW compensation - particularly public-sector or models with public sector wage floors - best institutionalize recommended CHW protections. Political will and long-term financing often remain challenges; removing ecosystem barriers - such as multilateral and bilateral restrictions on the payment of salaries - can help governments institutionalize CHW payment.

Prioritising the role of community health workers in the COVID-19 response.

COVID-19 disproportionately affects the poor and vulnerable. Community health workers are poised to play a pivotal role in fighting the pandemic, especially in countries with less resilient health systems. Drawing from practitioner expertise across four WHO regions, this article outlines the targeted actions needed at different stages of the pandemic to achieve the following goals: (1) PROTECT healthcare workers, (2) INTERRUPT the virus, (3) MAINTAIN existing healthcare services while surging their capacity, and (4) SHIELD the most vulnerable from socioeconomic shocks. While decisive action must be taken now to blunt the impact of the pandemic in countries likely to be hit the hardest, many of the investments in the supply chain, compensation, dedicated supervision, continuous training and performance management necessary for rapid community response in a pandemic are the same as those required to achieve universal healthcare and prevent the next epidemic.

Employing practitioner expertise in optimizing community healthcare systems.

To harness the potential of community health workers (CHWs) to extend health services to poor and marginalized populations and avoid the pitfalls of the post-Alma-Ata period, there is an urgent need to better understand how CHW programs can be optimized. Understanding that several operational questions are unresolved by current academic evidence, this viewpoint considers the role of practitioner expertise in optimizing community health systems and highlights findings from a recently published report that captures implementation experience from 15 countries. The viewpoint considers applications of the report's suggested community health design principles and implications for implementers, philanthropists, policymakers, and academic researchers.

Health policy and system support to optimise community health worker programmes: an abridged WHO guideline.

Optimising community health worker (CHW) programmes requires evidence-based policies on their education, deployment, and management. This guideline aims to inform efforts by planners, policy makers, and managers to improve CHW programmes as part of an integrated approach to strengthen primary health care and health systems. The development of this guideline followed the standard WHO approach to developing global guidelines. We conducted one overview of reviews, 15 systematic reviews (each one on a specific policy question), and a survey of stakeholders' views on the acceptability and feasibility of the interventions under consideration. We assessed the quality of systematic reviews using the AMSTAR tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. The overview of reviews identified 122 eligible articles and the systematic reviews identified 137 eligible primary studies. The stakeholder perception survey obtained inputs from 96 respondents. Recommendations were developed in the areas of CHW selection, preservice education, certification, supervision, remuneration and career advancement, planning, community embeddedness, and health system support. These are the first evidence-based global guidelines for health policy and system support to optimise community health worker programmes. Key considerations for implementation include the need to define the role of CHWs in relation to other health workers and plan for the health workforce as a whole rather than by specific occupational groups; appropriately integrate CHW programmes into the general health system and existing community systems; and ensure internal coherence and consistency across different policies and programmes affecting CHWs.

Systematic review of interventions for improving the performance of community health workers in low-income and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and critically appraise the evidence for the effects of interventions to improve the performance of community health workers (CHWs) for community-based primary healthcare in low- and middle-income countries. DESIGN: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. METHODS: 19 electronic databases were searched with a highly sensitive prespecified strategy and the grey literature examined, completed July 2016. Randomised controlled trials evaluating interventions to improve CHW performance in low- and middle-income countries were included and appraised for risk of bias. Outcomes were biological and behavioural patient outcomes (primary), use of health services, quality of care provided by CHWs and CHW retention (secondary). RESULTS: Two reviewers screened 8082 records; 14 evaluations were included. Due to heterogeneity and lack of clear outcome data, no meta-analysis was conducted. Results were presented in a narrative summary. The review found one study showing no effect on the biological outcomes of interest, though these moderate quality data may not be indicative of all biological outcomes. It also found moderate quality evidence of the efficacy of performance improvement interventions for (1) improving behavioural outcomes for patients, (2) improving use of services by increasing the absolute number of patients who access services and, perhaps, better identifying those who would benefit from such services and (3) improving CHW quality of care in terms of upstream measures like completion of prescribed activities and downstream measures like adherence to treatment protocols. Nearly half of studies were compound interventions, making it difficult to isolate the effects of individual performance improvement intervention components, though four specific strategies pertaining to recruitment, supervision, incentivisation and equipment were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Variations in recruitment, supervision, incentivisation and equipment may improve CHW performance. Practitioners should, however, assess the relevance and feasibility of these strategies in their health setting prior to implementation. Component selection experiments on a greater range of interventions to improve performance ought to be conducted.

Implementation research on community health workers' provision of maternal and child health services in rural Liberia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in the use of essential maternal and child health services in Konobo, Liberia, after implementation of an enhanced community health worker (CHW) programme. METHODS: The Liberian Ministry of Health partnered with Last Mile Health, a nongovernmental organization, to implement a pilot CHW programme with enhanced recruitment, training, supervision and compensation. To assess changes in maternal and child health-care use, we conducted repeated cross-sectional cluster surveys before (2012) and after (2015) programme implementation. FINDINGS: Between 2012 and 2015, 54 CHWs, seven peer supervisors and three clinical supervisors were trained to serve a population of 12 127 people in 44 communities. The regression-adjusted percentage of children receiving care from formal care providers increased by 60.1 (95% confidence interval, CI: 51.6 to 68.7) percentage points for diarrhoea, by 30.6 (95% CI: 20.5 to 40.7) for fever and by 51.2 (95% CI: 37.9 to 64.5) for acute respiratory infection. Facility-based delivery increased by 28.2 points (95% CI: 20.3 to 36.1). Facility-based delivery and formal sector care for acute respiratory infection and diarrhoea increased more in agricultural than gold-mining communities. Receipt of one-or-more antenatal care sessions at a health facility and postnatal care within 24 hours of delivery did not change significantly. CONCLUSION: We identified significant increases in uptake of child and maternal health-care services from formal providers during the pilot CHW programme in remote rural Liberia. Clinic-based services, such as postnatal care, and services in specific settings, such as mining areas, require additional interventions to achieve optimal outcomes.

Risk of bias in overviews of reviews: a scoping review of methodological guidance and four-item checklist.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the conditions under which employing an overview of systematic reviews is likely to lead to a high risk of bias. STUDY DESIGN: To synthesise existing guidance concerning overview practice, a scoping review was conducted. Four electronic databases were searched with a pre-specified strategy (PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015027592) ending October 2015. Included studies needed to describe or develop overview methodology. Data were narratively synthesised to delineate areas highlighted as outstanding challenges or where methodological recommendations conflict. RESULTS: Twenty-four papers met the inclusion criteria. There is emerging debate regarding overlapping systematic reviews; systematic review scope; quality of included research; updating; and synthesizing and reporting results. While three functions for overviews have been proposed-identify gaps, explore heterogeneity, summarize evidence-overviews cannot perform the first; are unlikely to achieve the second and third simultaneously; and can only perform the third under specific circumstances. Namely, when identified systematic reviews meet the following four conditions: (1) include primary trials that do not substantially overlap, (2) match overview scope, (3) are of high methodological quality, and (4) are up-to-date. CONCLUSION: Considering the intended function of proposed overviews with the corresponding methodological conditions may improve the quality of this burgeoning publication type. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Supporting Better Evidence Generation and Use within Social Innovation in Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: While several papers have highlighted a lack of evidence to scale social innovations in health, fewer have explored decision-maker understandings of the relative merit of different types of evidence, how such data are interpreted and applied, and what practical support is required to improve evidence generation. The objectives of this paper are to understand (1) beliefs and attitudes towards the value of and types of evidence in scaling social innovations for health, (2) approaches to evidence generation and evaluation used in systems and policy change, and (3) how better evidence-generation can be undertaken and supported within social innovation in health. METHODS: Thirty-two one-on-one interviews were conducted between July and November 2015 with purposively selected practitioners, policymakers, and funders from low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). Data were analysed using a Framework Analysis Approach. RESULTS: While practitioners, funders, and policymakers said they held outcome evidence in high regard, their practices only bear out this assertion to varying degrees. Few have given systematic consideration to potential unintended consequences, in particular harm, of the programs they implement, fund, or adopt. Stakeholders suggest that better evidence-generation can be undertaken and supported within social innovation in health by supporting the research efforts of emerging community organizations; creating links between practitioners and academia; altering the funding landscape for evidence-generation; providing responsive technical education; and creating accountability for funders, practitioners, and policymakers. CONCLUSION: How better evidence-generation can be undertaken and supported within social innovation in health is a previously under-operationalised aspect of the policy-making process that remains essential in order to refrain from causing harm, enable the optimization of existing interventions, and ultimately, to scale and fund what works.