Health inequalities at the intersection of multiple social determinants among under five children residing Nairobi urban slums: An application of multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA).

In this analysis we examine through an intersectionality lens how key social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with health conditions among under-five children (<5y) residing in Nairobi slums, Kenya. We used cross-sectional data collected from Nairobi slums between June and November 2012 to explore how multiple interactions of SDoH shape health inequalities in slums. We applied multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA) approach. We constructed intersectional strata for each health condition from combinations of significant SDoH obtained using univariate analyses. We then estimated the intersectional effects of health condition in a series of MAIHDA logistic regression models distinguishing between additive and interaction effects. We quantified discriminatory accuracy (DA) of the intersectional strata by means of the variance partitioning coefficient (VPC) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). The total participants were 2,199 <5y, with 120 records (5.5%) dropped because health conditions were recorded as "not applicable". The main outcome variables were three health conditions: 1) whether a child had diarrhea or not, 2) whether a child had fever or not, and 3) whether a child had cough or not in the previous two weeks. We found non-significant intersectional effects for each health condition. The head of household ethnic group was significantly associated with each health condition. We found good DA for diarrhea (VPC = 9.0%, AUC-ROC = 76.6%) an indication of large intersectional effects. However, fever (VPC = 1.9%, AUC-ROC = 66.3%) and cough (VPC = 0.5%, AUC-ROC = 61.8%) had weak DA indicating existence of small intersectional effects. Our study shows pathways for SDoH that affect diarrhea, cough, and fever for <5y living in slums are multiplicative and shared. The findings show that <5y from Luo and Luhya ethnic groups, recent migrants (less than 2 years), and households experiencing CHE are more likely to face worse health outcomes. We recommend relevant stakeholders to develop strategies aimed at identifying these groups for targeted proportionate universalism based on the level of their need.

Effects of social determinants on children's health in informal settlements in Bangladesh and Kenya through an intersectionality lens: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have shown that residents of urban informal settlements/slums are usually excluded and marginalised from formal social systems and structures of power leading to disproportionally worse health outcomes compared to other urban dwellers. To promote health equity for slum dwellers, requires an understanding of how their lived realities shape inequities especially for young children 0-4 years old (ie, under-fives) who tend to have a higher mortality compared with non-slum children. In these proposed studies, we aim to examine how key Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) factors at child and household levels combine to affect under-five health conditions, who live in slums in Bangladesh and Kenya through an intersectionality lens. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol describes how we will analyse data from the Nairobi Cross-sectional Slum Survey (NCSS 2012) for Kenya and the Urban Health Survey (UHS 2013) for Bangladesh to explore how SDoH influence under-five health outcomes in slums within an intersectionality framework. The NCSS 2012 and UHS 2013 samples will consist of 2199 and 3173 under-fives, respectively. We will apply Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy approach. Some of SDoH characteristics to be considered will include those of children, head of household, mothers and social structure characteristics of household. The primary outcomes will be whether a child had diarrhoea, cough, fever and acute respiratory infection (ARI) 2 weeks preceding surveys. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be disseminated in international peer-reviewed journals and presented in events organised by the Accountability and Responsiveness in Informal Settlements for Equity consortium and international conferences. Ethical approval was not required for these studies. Access to the NCSS 2012 has been given by Africa Population and Health Center and UHS 2013 is freely available.

Implications of COVID-19 for safeguarding in international development research: learning, action and reflection from a research hub.

COVID-19 brings uncertainties and new precarities for communities and researchers, altering and amplifying relational vulnerabilities (vulnerabilities which emerge from relationships of unequal power and place those less powerful at risk of abuse and violence). Research approaches have changed too, with increasing use of remote data collection methods. These multiple changes necessitate new or adapted safeguarding responses. This practice piece shares practical learnings and resources on safeguarding from the Accountability for Informal Urban Equity hub, which uses participatory action research, aiming to catalyse change in approaches to enhancing accountability and improving the health and well-being of marginalised people living and working in informal urban spaces in Bangladesh, India, Kenya and Sierra Leone. We outline three new challenges that emerged in the context of the pandemic (1): exacerbated relational vulnerabilities and dilemmas for researchers in responding to increased reports of different forms of violence coupled with support services that were limited prior to the pandemic becoming barely functional or non-existent in some research sites, (2) the increased use of virtual and remote research methods, with implications for safeguarding and (3) new stress, anxiety and vulnerabilities experienced by researchers. We then outline our learning and recommended action points for addressing emerging challenges, linking practice to the mnemonic 'the four Rs: recognise, respond, report, refer'. COVID-19 has intensified safeguarding risks. We stress the importance of communities, researchers and co-researchers engaging in dialogue and ongoing discussions of power and positionality, which are important to foster co-learning and co-production of safeguarding processes.

How to prevent and address safeguarding concerns in global health research programmes: practice, process and positionality in marginalised spaces.

Safeguarding is rapidly rising up the international development agenda, yet literature on safeguarding in related research is limited. This paper shares processes and practice relating to safeguarding within an international research consortium (the ARISE hub, known as ARISE). ARISE aims to enhance accountability and improve the health and well-being of marginalised people living and working in informal urban spaces in low-income and middle-income countries (Bangladesh, India, Kenya and Sierra Leone). Our manuscript is divided into three key sections. We start by discussing the importance of safeguarding in global health research and consider how thinking about vulnerability as a relational concept (shaped by unequal power relations and structural violence) can help locate fluid and context specific safeguarding risks within broader social systems. We then discuss the different steps undertaken in ARISE to develop a shared approach to safeguarding: sharing institutional guidelines and practice; facilitating a participatory process to agree a working definition of safeguarding and joint understandings of vulnerabilities, risks and mitigation strategies and share experiences; developing action plans for safeguarding. This is followed by reflection on our key learnings including how safeguarding, ethics and health and safety concerns overlap; the challenges of referral and support for safeguarding concerns within frequently underserved informal urban spaces; and the importance of reflective practice and critical thinking about power, judgement and positionality and the ownership of the global narrative surrounding safeguarding. We finish by situating our learning within debates on decolonising science and argue for the importance of an iterative, ongoing learning journey that is critical, reflective and inclusive of vulnerable people.