Challenges to research implementation during public health emergencies: anecdote of insights and lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic in Gujarat, India.

Health emergencies, including pandemics, are not new occurrences; some notable ones occurred in the past. However, the scale of the COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the unpreparedness of national health systems in effectively managing health emergencies. During the pandemic, controlling the spread of the virus and hopes of exiting into a post-pandemic era were reliant on research to improve patient care and inform government policies. Nonetheless, research implementation during health emergencies can be challenging in low-resourced settings. This paper presents anecdotes of experiences and offers insight into ways research can be supported during health emergencies. We implemented a longitudinal study to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including SARS-CoV-2 infection, during pregnancy on maternal and child health outcomes. The study utilized hospital databases to recruit women who were infected and with no known SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Mother-infant pairs in the infected and uninfected group were then followed longitudinally for 3 years. Observations, including challenges during planning, record retrieval, tracking, recruitment, and follow-up of eligible women, were reported by research staff. The challenges observed were group into three overarching themes: (a) individual factors, (b) health system challenges, and (c) research operational challenges. Some notable observations include misinformation, misconception, mistrust, underdeveloped health record systems, stigma, and hesitance. Early planning, effective communication, and community awareness can help in implementing a successful research project. Additionally, efforts to improve collaboration and co-creation between health practitioners, researchers, and the public may benefit the implementation of research projects during a health emergency.

One Health Risk and Disease (OHRAD): a tool to prioritise the risks for epidemic-prone diseases from One Health perspective.

BACKGROUND: The rise in epidemic-prone diseases daily poses a serious concern globally. Evidence suggests that many of these diseases are of animal origin and contribute to economic loss. Considering the limited time and other resources available for the animal and human health sectors, selecting the most urgent and significant risk factors and diseases is vital, even though all epidemic-prone diseases and associated risk factors should be addressed. The main aim of developing this tool is to provide a readily accessible instrument for prioritising risk factors and diseases that could lead to disease emergence, outbreak or epidemic. METHODS: This tool uses a quantitative and semi-quantitative multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method that involves five steps: Identifying risk factors and diseases, Weighting the criteria, Risk and disease scoring, Calculating risk impact and disease burden score, and Ranking risks and diseases. It is intended to be implemented through a co-creation workshop and involves individual and group activities. The last two steps are automated in the MS Excel score sheet. RESULTS: This One Health Risk and Disease (OHRAD) prioritisation tool starts with an individual activity of identifying the risks and diseases from the more extensive list. This, then, leads to a group activity of weighing the criteria and providing scores for each risk and disease. Finally, the individual risk and disease scores with the rankings are generated in this tool. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of this OHRAD prioritisation tool is that the top risks and diseases are prioritised for the particular context from One Health perspective. This prioritised list will help experts and officials decide which epidemic-prone diseases to focus on and for which to develop and design prevention and control measures.