Understanding Health Inequalities Research Capacities: Insights and Recommendations From Comparing Two High Income Settings.

Generating evidence on health inequalities (HI) is necessary to raise awareness of these issues, describe and monitor their evolution, analyze their causes, and inform interventions aiming to improve health equity. Yet not all cities and countries have the capacity to produce this type of research. Recent research provides new contextual and causal insights into this research production process, and in-depth understanding on why and how this type of research is produced in certain settings. This article aims to analyze two recent case studies that have uniquely explored this process in two high producers of HI research and high-income country settings to identify learning and distil recommendations, which may be insightful for other settings. Expanding and investing in this line of research is critical, particularly in places with lower HI research output and related capacity, in order to identify key contextual conditions and mechanisms that may enable or hinder this process. This new knowledge could guide the development of new HI research capacity strengthening strategies to foster this research in different settings, worldwide. More understanding is also needed on the relationship between HI research, policy, and action in order to tackle HI.

Why and how has the United Kingdom become a high producer of health inequalities research over the past 50 years? A realist explanatory case study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on health inequalities has been growing over the past few decades, yet the capacity to produce research on health inequalities varies between countries worldwide and needs to be strengthened. More in-depth understanding of the sociohistorical, political and institutional processes that enable this type of research and related research capacity to be generated in different contexts is needed. A recent bibliometric analysis of the health inequalities research field found inequalities in the global production of this type of research. It also found the United Kingdom to be the second-highest global contributor to this research field after the United States. This study aims to understand why and how the United Kingdom, as an example of a "high producer" of health inequalities research, has been able to generate so much health inequalities research over the past five decades, and which main mechanisms might have been involved in generating this specific research capacity over time. METHODS: We conducted a realist explanatory case study, which included 12 semi-structured interviews, to test six theoretical mechanisms that we proposed might have been involved in this process. Data from the interviews and grey and scientific literature were triangulated to inform our findings. RESULTS: We found evidence to suggest that at least four of our proposed mechanisms have been activated by certain conditions and have contributed to the health inequalities research production process in the United Kingdom over the past 50 years. Limited evidence suggests that two new mechanisms might have potentially also been at play. CONCLUSIONS: Valuable learning can be established from this case study, which explores the United Kingdom's experience in developing a strong national health inequalities research tradition, and the potential mechanisms involved in this process. More research is needed to explore additional facilitating and inhibiting mechanisms and other factors involved in this process in this context, as well as in other settings where less health inequalities research has been produced. This type of in-depth knowledge could be used to guide the development of new health inequalities research capacity-strengthening strategies and support the development of novel approaches and solutions aiming to tackle health inequalities.

Impact of COVID-19 inequalities on children: An intersectional analysis.

Societal concerns about the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have largely focussed on the social groups most directly affected, such as the elderly and health workers. However, less focus has been placed on understanding the effects on other collectives, such as children. While children's physical health appears to be less affected than the adult population, their mental health, learning and wellbeing is likely to have been significantly negatively affected during the pandemic due to the varying policy restrictions, such as withdrawal from face to face schooling, limited peer-to-peer interactions and mobility and increased exposure to the digital world amongst other things. Children from vulnerable social backgrounds, and especially girls, will be most negatively affected by the impact of COVID-19, given their different intersecting realities and the power structures already negatively affecting them. To strengthen the understanding of the social determinants of the COVID-19 crisis that unequally influence children's health and wellbeing, this article presents a conceptual framework that considers the multiple axes of inequalities and power relations. This understanding can then be used to inform analyses and impact assessments, and in turn inform the development of effective and equitable mitigation strategies as well as assist to be better prepared for future pandemics.

Deaths of Despair: A Scoping Review on the Social Determinants of Drug Overdose, Alcohol-Related Liver Disease and Suicide.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on the social determinants of Deaths of Despair (DoD), i.e., an increase in mortality attributed to drug overdose, alcohol-related liver disease, and suicide in the United States (USA) during recent years. The objective of this study was to review the scientific literature on DoD with the purpose of identifying relevant social determinants and inequalities related to these mortality trends. METHODS: Scoping review focusing on the period 2015-2022 based on PubMed search. Articles were selected according to the following inclusion criteria: published between 1 January 2000 and 31 October 2021; including empirical data; analyzed DoD including the three causes defined by Case and Deaton; analyzed at least one social determinant; written in English; and studied DoD in the USA context only. Studies were excluded if they only analyzed adolescent populations. We synthesized our findings in a narrative report specifically addressing DoD by economic conditions, occupational hazards, educational level, geographical setting, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included. Overall, findings identify a progressive increase in deaths attributable to suicide, drug overdose, and alcohol-related liver disease in the USA in the last two decades. The literature concerning DoD and social determinants is relatively scarce and some determinants have been barely studied. However different, however, large inequalities have been identified in the manner in which the causes of death embedded in the concept of DoD affect different subpopulations, particularly African American, and Hispanic populations, but blue collar-whites are also significantly impacted. Low socioeconomic position and education levels and working in jobs with high insecurity, unemployment, and living in rural areas were identified as the most relevant social determinants of DoD. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for further research on the structural and intermediate social determinants of DoD and social mechanisms. Intersectional and systemic approaches are needed to better understand and tackle DoD and related inequalities.

Inequalities in COVID-19 inequalities research: Who had the capacity to respond?

The COVID-19 pandemic has been testing countries' capacities and scientific preparedness to actively respond and collaborate on a common global threat. It has also heightened awareness of the urgent need to empirically describe and analyze health inequalities to be able to act effectively. In turn, this raises several important questions that need answering: What is known about the rapidly emerging COVID-19 inequalities research field? Which countries and world regions have been able to rapidly produce research on this topic? What research patterns and trends have emerged, and how to these compared to the (pre-COVID-19) global health inequalities research field? Which countries have been scientifically collaborating on this important topic? Where are the scientific knowledge gaps, and indirectly where might research capacities need to be strengthened? In order to answer these queries, we analyzed the global scientific production (2020-2021) on COVID-19 associated inequalities by conducting bibliometric and network analyses using the Scopus database. Specifically, we analyzed the volume of scientific production per country (via author affiliations), its distribution by country income groups and world regions, as well as the inter-country collaborations within this production. Our results indicate that the COVID-19 inequalities research field has been highly collaborative; however, a number of significant inequitable research practices exist. When compared to the (pre-COVID-19) global health inequalities research field, similar inequalities were identified, however, several new dynamics and partnerships have also emerged that warrant further in-depth exploration. To ensure preparedness for future crises, and effective strategies to tackle growing social inequalities in health, investment in global health inequalities research capacities must be a priority for all.

COVID-19 and the global need for knowledge on nurses' health.

AIM: To emphasize that nurses need to be fully protected to carry out their vital role, particularly during pandemics, yet the lack of a standardized and systematic collection of high-quality disaggregated data on nurses health inhibits our ability to assess this within and across countries. BACKGROUND: Nurses are the largest workforce group in the health sector, yet only 59 countries worldwide report on nurse COVID-19 infections and related deaths, and the standardized, systematic collection of disaggregated health data is not yet in place. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Medline, International Council of Nurses, World Health Organization, Centers of Disease Control and Prevention and the experiences of the authors. DISCUSSION: Inconsistent recording and definitions of nurses, precarious and informal employment conditions, limited transparent and reliable data, lack of mass testing and long-standing structural issues and biases have affected nursing for too long. CONCLUSIONS: These issues are reflected in the limited capacity of many national public health information systems to collect, monitor and report on the health of the largest group of health workers. Political will, accountability and public data transparency at different levels are essential to adequately protect nurses at work. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE, AND NURSING AND HEALTH POLICY: Building on current momentum in the nursing field, immediate political action is required to strengthen existing nursing and midwifery policies, standards and regulatory capacity, as well as existing public health services and information and surveillance systems. The generation of up-to-date, context-specific knowledge is needed to inform and monitor political decisions related to the protection of nurses, and the improvement of their employment conditions, as well as to strengthen accountability for these areas at various levels.

The case for planetary health prevention.

The lack of preparedness and the adoption of a reactive approach underlie many mistakes in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. We need a vision with a proactive approach to planetary health prevention, that is suited for addressing the neglected systemic determinants of health which generate disease, inequality and environmental degradation, and capable of anticipating known and unknown risks, and foreseeing possible threatening scenarios. To achieve a healthy, equitable and sustainable future, it is time to make health prevention planetary.

A Delphi-method-based consensus guideline for definition of treatment-resistant depression for clinical trials.

Criteria for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and partially responsive depression (PRD) as subtypes of major depressive disorder (MDD) are not unequivocally defined. In the present document we used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to define TRD and PRD and to serve as operational criteria for future clinical studies, especially if conducted for regulatory purposes. We reviewed the literature and brought together a group of international experts (including clinicians, academics, researchers, employees of pharmaceutical companies, regulatory bodies representatives, and one person with lived experience) to evaluate the state-of-the-art and main controversies regarding the current classification. We then provided recommendations on how to design clinical trials, and on how to guide research in unmet needs and knowledge gaps. This report will feed into one of the main objectives of the EUropean Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatforms, Innovative Medicines Initiative (EU-PEARL, IMI) MDD project, to design a protocol for platform trials of new medications for TRD/PRD.

What key conditions and mechanisms generate health inequalities research in different contexts? Study protocol for two realist explanatory case studies.

Evidence on health inequalities has grown in recent decades, however, the capacity to generate health inequalities research is uneven, worldwide. A recent bibliometric analysis found notable inequalities of the global production of health inequalities scientific research across countries. What determines the capacity to produce high volumes of health inequalities scientific research, in different settings? What mechanisms are involved? To answer these questions requires in-depth knowledge on the health inequalities research production process, in different settings. We plan to conduct two realist explanatory case studies, to understand why and how particular settings (e.g. the United Kingdom and the city of Barcelona) have generated high volumes of health inequalities research over past decades, and identify the potential key contextual conditions and causal mechanisms involved. This study protocol outlines the rationale and methodology involved, highlights the strengths and limitations of the approach, and provides guidance on how to overcome certain operational challenges and ensure validity of research findings. Valuable learning may be derived from these case experiences, with implications for research, policy and practice. This work can serve as a tool for researcher and planners to guide the development of further case studies to evaluate health inequalities research capacities in other settings.

COVID-SCORE Spain: public perceptions of key government COVID-19 control measures.

BACKGROUND: Spain was initially one of the countries most affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In June 2020, the COVID-SCORE-10 study reported that the Spanish public's perception of their government's response to the pandemic was low. This study examines these perceptions in greater detail. METHODS: We employed an ordered logistic regression analysis using COVID-SCORE-10 data to examine the Spanish public's perception of 10 key aspects of their government's COVID-19 control measures. These included support for daily needs, mental and general health services, communication, information and coordination, which were examined by gender, age, education level, having been affected by COVID-19 and trust in government's success in addressing unexpected health threats. RESULTS: 'Trust in the government' showed the greatest odds of positive perception for the 10 measures studied. Odds of positive perception of communication significantly varied by gender, education level and having been affected by COVID-19, whereas for information and coordination of disease control, odds significantly varied by gender and having been affected by COVID-19. Odds of positive perception for access to mental health services significantly varied by gender and education level. Age was not significant. CONCLUSION: Public perception of the government's pandemic response in Spain varied by socio-demographic and individual variables, particularly by reported trust in the government. Fostering public trust during health threats may improve perception of response efforts. Future efforts should tailor interventions that consider gender, education level and whether people have been affected by COVID-19.

Health Inequalities in the Time of COVID-19: The Globally Reinforcing Need to Strengthen Health Inequalities Research Capacities.

The full impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is yet to be well established; however, as the pandemic spreads, and early results emerge, unmet needs are being revealed, and pressing questions are being asked about who is most affected, how, where, and in what ways government responses might be exacerbating inequalities. A number of scholars have called for more in-depth critical research on COVID-19 and health inequalities to produce a strong empirical evidence based on these issues. There are also justifiable concerns about the scarcity of health-equity actions oriented analyses of the situation and calls for more empirical evidence on COVID-19 and health inequalities. A preliminary condition to establish this type of information is strong capacity to conduct health inequalities research. Worldwide, however, this type of capacity is limited, which, alongside other challenges, will likely hinder capacities of many countries to develop comprehensive equity-oriented COVID-19 analyses, and adequate responses to present and future crises. The current pandemic reinforces the pending need to invest in and strengthen these research capacities. These capacities must be supported by widespread recognition and concern, cognitive social capital, and greater commitment to coordinated, transparent action, and responsibility. Otherwise, we will remain inadequately prepared to respond and meet our society's unmet needs.

A novel conceptual model and heuristic tool to strengthen understanding and capacities for health inequalities research.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing evidence on health inequalities over the past decades, further efforts to strengthen capacities to produce research on this topic are still urgently needed to inform effective interventions aiming to address these inequalities. To strengthen these research capacities, an initial comprehensive understanding of the health inequalities research production process is vital. However, most existing research and models are focused on understanding the relationship between health inequalities research and policy, with less focus on the health inequalities research production process itself. Existing conceptual frameworks provide valuable, yet limited, advancements on this topic; for example, they lack the capacity to comprehensively explain the health (and more specifically the health inequalities) research production process at the local level, including the potential pathways, components and determinants as well as the dynamics that might be involved. This therefore reduces their ability to be empirically tested and to provide practical guidance on how to strengthen the health inequalities research process and research capacities in different settings. Several scholars have also highlighted the need for further understanding and guidance in this area to inform effective action. METHODS: Through a critical review, we developed a novel conceptual model that integrates the social determinants of health and political economy perspectives to provide a comprehensive understanding of how health inequalities research and the related research capacities are likely to be produced (or inhibited) at local level. RESULTS: Our model represents a global hypothesis on the fundamental processes involved, and can serve as a heuristic tool to guide local level assessments of the determinants, dynamics and relations that might be relevant to better understand the health inequalities research production process and the related research capacities. CONCLUSIONS: This type of knowledge can assist researchers and decision-makers to identify any information gaps or barriers to be addressed, and establish new entry points to effectively strengthen these research capacities. This can lead to the production of a stronger evidence base, both locally and globally, which can be used to inform strategic efforts aimed at achieving health equity.

Health equity monitoring is essential in public health: lessons from Mozambique.

BACKGROUND: Countries must be able to describe and monitor their populations health and well-being needs in an attempt to understand and address them. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have re-emphasized the need to invest in comprehensive health information systems to monitor progress towards health equity; however, knowledge on the capacity of health information systems to be able do this, particularly in low-income countries, remains very limited. As a case study, we aimed to evaluate the current capacity of the national health information systems in Mozambique, and the available indicators to monitor health inequalities, in line with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well Being for All at All Ages). METHODS: A data source mapping of the health information system in Mozambique was conducted. We followed the World Health Organization's methodology of assessing data sources to evaluate the information available for every equity stratifier using a three-point scale: 1 - information is available, 2 - need for more information, and 3 - an information gap. Also, for each indicator we estimated the national average inequality score. RESULTS: Eight data sources contain health information to measure and monitor progress towards health equity in line with the 27 SDG3 indicators. Seven indicators bear information with nationally funded data sources, ten with data sources externally funded, and ten indicators either lack information or it does not applicable for the matter of the study. None of the 27 indicators associated with SDG3 can be fully disaggregated by equity stratifiers; they either lack some information (15 indicators) or do not have information at all (nine indicators). The indicators that contain more information are related to maternal and child health. CONCLUSIONS: There are important information gaps in Mozambique's current national health information system which prevents it from being able to comprehensively measure and monitor health equity. Comprehensive national health information systems are an essential public health need. Significant policy and political challenges must also be addressed to ensure effective interventions and action towards health equity in the country.

Correction to: Evaluation of the mortality registry in Ecuador (2001-2013) - social and geographical inequalities in completeness and quality.

Following the publication of this article [1], the authors reported a typesetting error in Table 1 that caused the columns of the table to be ordered incorrectly, and a typographical error in a sentence in the Conclusions section.

Evaluation of the mortality registry in Ecuador (2001-2013) - social and geographical inequalities in completeness and quality.

BACKGROUND: Mortality registries are an essential data source for public health surveillance and for planning and evaluating public policy. Nevertheless, there are still large inequalities in the completeness and quality of mortality registries between and within countries. In Ecuador, there have been few nationwide evaluations of the mortality registry and no evaluations of inequalities between provinces. This kind of analysis is fundamental for strengthening the vital statistics system. METHODS: Ecological study assessing the completeness, quality and internal consistency of mortality data in the provinces of Ecuador, using 13 years of mortality data (2001-2013). Completeness was assessed using three types of death distribution methods (DDMs), quality by estimating the percentages of garbage codes and deaths with unspecified age or sex in the registered deaths, and internal consistency by estimating the percentage of deaths with reported causes of deaths considered impossible in some age-sex combinations. Finally, we propose a classification of the mortality registry in the studied areas based on completeness and quality. RESULTS: Completeness estimates (mean of the three methods used) in the provinces ranged from 21 to 87% in women and from 35 to 89% in men. The percentage of garbage codes in the provinces ranged from 21 to 56% in women and from 25 to 52% in men. Garbage coding was higher in women and in older age groups. The percentage of deaths with unspecified age or sex, and the percentage of deaths with reported causes of deaths considered impossible in some age-sex combinations was low in all the studied areas. The mortality registry could only be classified as acceptable in one area for men and one area for women. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial inequalities by sex, geographical areas and age in the completeness and quality of the mortality registry of Ecuador. The findings of this study will be helpful to direct measures to improve Ecuador's vital statistics system and to generate strategies to reduce bias when using mortality data to analyse health inequalities in the country.

Project INTEGRATE: Developing a Framework to Guide Design, Implementation and Evaluation of People-centred Integrated Care Processes.

BACKGROUND: People-centred integrated care is an acknowledged approach to improve the quality and effectiveness of health systems in delivering care around people's needs and preferences. Nevertheless, more guidance on how to effectively design, implement and evaluate the care process of people-centred integrated care services is needed. Under Project INTEGRATE, a framework was developed to guide managers in the assessment, transformation and delivery of these health service innovations. METHODS: The framework is a product of the synthesis of operations, service and project management literature, relevant health care literature, and the analysis of four good practice integrated care case studies analysed under Project INTEGRATE. A first iteration of the framework was developed and then applied to one of the integrated care case studies to test its validity and utility. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The tool combines a number of important considerations and criteria that have not been previously included in integrated care assessment frameworks, allowing for a pragmatic and comprehensive analysis of the care process. CONCLUSION: This framework can be used as a stand-alone or combined tool to guide managers to plan and evaluate the care process design of people-centred integrated care services; future work should apply this tool to other settings.

Inequalities in global health inequalities research: A 50-year bibliometric analysis (1966-2015).

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence shows that health inequalities exist between and within countries, and emphasis has been placed on strengthening the production and use of the global health inequalities research, so as to improve capacities to act. Yet, a comprehensive overview of this evidence base is still needed, to determine what is known about the global and historical scientific production on health inequalities to date, how is it distributed in terms of country income groups and world regions, how has it changed over time, and what international collaboration dynamics exist. METHODS: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the global scientific production on health inequalities, from 1966 to 2015, was conducted using Scopus database. The historical and global evolution of the study of health inequalities was considered, and through joinpoint regression analysis and visualisation network maps, the preceding questions were examined. FINDINGS: 159 countries (via authorship affiliation) contributed to this scientific production, three times as many countries than previously found. Scientific output on health inequalities has exponentially grown over the last five decades, with several marked shift points, and a visible country-income group affiliation gradient in the initiation and consistent publication frequency. Higher income countries, especially Anglo-Saxon and European countries, disproportionately dominate first and co-authorship, and are at the core of the global collaborative research networks, with the Global South on the periphery. However, several country anomalies exist that suggest that the causes of these research inequalities, and potential underlying dependencies, run deeper than simply differences in country income and language. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the global evidence base has expanded, Global North-South research gaps exist, persist and, in some cases, are widening. Greater understanding of the structural determinants of these research inequalities and national research capacities is needed, to further strengthen the evidence base, and support the long term agenda for global health equity.

Advancing the role of nurses and midwives in Ireland: pioneering transformation of the health workforce for noncommunicable diseases in Europe: good practice brief

A survey that included 32 countries in Europe in 2015 found that more than two thirds had extended the official scopes of practice of nurses in primary care. Ireland is one of those countries. The first Nurse Prescriber was registered in 2008. Independent evaluation found increased patient satisfaction with the care and information they received, greater professional satisfaction of nurses and midwives and consensus among clinical stakeholders that the new roles resulted in the delivery of effective, high-quality care to patients while reducing some of the workload of primary care physicians.