Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 54
Filter
2.
BMJ Glob Health ; 8(3)2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36889807

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Two years since the murder of George Floyd, there has been unprecedented attention to racial justice by global public health organisations. Still, there is scepticism that attention alone will lead to real change. METHODS: We identified the highest-ranked 15 public health universities, academic journals and funding agencies, and used a standardised data extraction template to analyse the organisation's governance structures, leadership dynamics and public statements on antiracism since 1 May 2020. RESULTS: We found that the majority of organisations (26/45) have not made any public statements in response to calls for antiracism actions, and that decision-making bodies are still lacking diversity and representation from the majority of the world's population. Of those organisations that have made public statements (19/45), we identified seven types of commitments including policy change, financial resources, education and training. Most commitments were not accompanied by accountability measures, such as setting goals or developing metrics of progress, which raises concerns about how antiracism commitments are being tracked, as well as how they can be translated into tangible action. CONCLUSION: The absence of any kind of public statement paired with the greater lack of commitments and accountability measures calls into question whether leading public health organisations are concretely committed to racial justice and antiracism reform.


Subject(s)
Periodicals as Topic , Public Health , Humans , Universities , Antiracism , Social Responsibility , Decision Making
3.
PLoS One ; 18(3): e0282267, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36862717

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials are the gold-standard for clinical evidence generation, but they can sometimes be limited by infeasibility and unclear generalizability to real-world practice. External control arm (ECA) studies may help address this evidence gaps by constructing retrospective cohorts that closely emulate prospective ones. Experience in constructing these outside the context of rare diseases or cancer is limited. We piloted an approach for developing an ECA in Crohn's disease using electronic health records (EHR) data. METHODS: We queried EHR databases and manually screened records at the University of California, San Francisco to identify patients meeting the eligibility criteria of TRIDENT, a recently completed interventional trial involving an ustekinumab reference arm. We defined timepoints to balance missing data and bias. We compared imputation models by their impacts on cohort membership and outcomes. We assessed the accuracy of algorithmic data curation against manual review. Lastly, we assessed disease activity following treatment with ustekinumab. RESULTS: Screening identified 183 patients. 30% of the cohort had missing baseline data. Nonetheless, cohort membership and outcomes were robust to the method of imputation. Algorithms for ascertaining non-symptom-based elements of disease activity using structured data were accurate against manual review. The cohort consisted of 56 patients, exceeding planned enrollment in TRIDENT. 34% of the cohort was in steroid-free remission at week 24. CONCLUSION: We piloted an approach for creating an ECA in Crohn's disease from EHR data by using a combination of informatics and manual methods. However, our study reveals significant missing data when standard-of-care clinical data are repurposed. More work will be needed to improve the alignment of trial design with typical patterns of clinical practice, and thereby enable a future of more robust ECAs in chronic diseases like Crohn's disease.


Subject(s)
Crohn Disease , Ustekinumab , Humans , Ustekinumab/therapeutic use , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Pilot Projects , Electronic Health Records , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
4.
Lancet ; 401(10377): 673-687, 2023 02 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36682374

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed faults in the way we assess preparedness and response capacities for public health emergencies. Existing frameworks are limited in scope, and do not sufficiently consider complex social, economic, political, regulatory, and ecological factors. One Health, through its focus on the links among humans, animals, and ecosystems, is a valuable approach through which existing assessment frameworks can be analysed and new ways forward proposed. Although in the past few years advances have been made in assessment tools such as the International Health Regulations Joint External Evaluation, a rapid and radical increase in ambition is required. To sufficiently account for the range of complex systems in which health emergencies occur, assessments should consider how problems are defined across stakeholders and the wider sociopolitical environments in which structures and institutions operate. Current frameworks do little to consider anthropogenic factors in disease emergence or address the full array of health security hazards across the social-ecological system. A complex and interdependent set of challenges threaten human, animal, and ecosystem health, and we cannot afford to overlook important contextual factors, or the determinants of these shared threats. Health security assessment frameworks should therefore ensure that the process undertaken to prioritise and build capacity adheres to core One Health principles and that interventions and outcomes are assessed in terms of added value, trade-offs, and cobenefits across human, animal, and environmental health systems.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , One Health , Animals , Humans , Global Health , Ecosystem , Emergencies , Pandemics
6.
Lancet Glob Health ; 10(11): e1675-e1683, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36179734

ABSTRACT

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, several international initiatives have been developed to strengthen and reform the global architecture for pandemic preparedness and response, including proposals for a pandemic treaty, a Pandemic Fund, and mechanisms for equitable access to medical countermeasures. These initiatives seek to make use of crucial lessons gleaned from the ongoing pandemic by addressing gaps in health security and traditional public health functions. However, there has been insufficient consideration of the vital role of universal health coverage in sustainably mitigating outbreaks, and the importance of robust primary health care in equitably and efficiently safeguarding communities from future health threats. The international community should not repeat the mistakes of past health security efforts that ultimately contributed to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and disproportionately affected vulnerable and marginalised populations, especially by overlooking the importance of coherent, multisectoral health systems. This Health Policy paper outlines major (although often neglected) gaps in pandemic preparedness and response, which are applicable to broader health emergency preparedness and response efforts, and identifies opportunities to reconceptualise health security by scaling up universal health coverage. We then offer a comprehensive set of recommendations to help inform the development of key pandemic preparedness and response proposals across three themes-governance, financing, and supporting initiatives. By identifying approaches that simultaneously strengthen health systems through global health security and universal health coverage, we aim to provide tangible solutions that equitably meet the needs of all communities while ensuring resilience to future pandemic threats.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Health , Humans , International Cooperation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Universal Health Insurance
7.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(8)2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34341021

ABSTRACT

How do choices in criminal law and rights protections affect disease-fighting efforts? This long-standing question facing governments around the world is acute in the context of pandemics like HIV and COVID-19. The Global AIDS Strategy of the last 5 years sought to prevent mortality and HIV transmission in part through ensuring people living with HIV (PLHIV) knew their HIV status and could suppress the HIV virus through antiretroviral treatment. This article presents a cross-national ecological analysis of the relative success of national AIDS responses under this strategy, where laws were characterised by more or less criminalisation and with varying rights protections. In countries where same-sex sexual acts were criminalised, the portion of PLHIV who knew their HIV status was 11% lower and viral suppression levels 8% lower. Sex work criminalisation was associated with 10% lower knowledge of status and 6% lower viral suppression. Drug use criminalisation was associated with 14% lower levels of both. Criminalising all three of these areas was associated with approximately 18%-24% worse outcomes. Meanwhile, national laws on non-discrimination, independent human rights institutions and gender-based violence were associated with significantly higher knowledge of HIV status and higher viral suppression among PLHIV. Since most countries did not achieve 2020 HIV goals, this ecological evidence suggests that law reform may be an important tool in speeding momentum to halt the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Work
8.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(6)2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34117009

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Routine health information system(s) (RHIS) facilitate the collection of health data at all levels of the health system allowing estimates of disease prevalence, treatment and preventive intervention coverage, and risk factors to guide disease control strategies. This core health system pillar remains underdeveloped in many low-income and middle-income countries. Efforts to improve RHIS data coverage, quality and timeliness were launched over 10 years ago. METHODS: A systematic review was performed across 12 databases and literature search engines for both peer-reviewed articles and grey literature reports on RHIS interventions. Studies were analysed in three stages: (1) categorisation of RHIS intervention components and processes; (2) comparison of intervention component effectiveness and (3) whether the post-intervention outcome improved above the WHO integrated disease surveillance response framework data quality standard of 80% or above. RESULTS: 5294 references were screened, resulting in 56 studies. Three key performance determinants-technical, organisational and behavioural-were proposed as critical to RHIS strengthening. Seventy-seven per cent [77%] of studies identified addressed all three determinants. The most frequently implemented intervention components were 'providing training' and 'using an electronic health management information systems'. Ninety-three per cent [93%] of pre-post or controlled trial studies showed improvements in one or more data quality outputs, but after applying a standard threshold of >80% post-intervention, this number reduced to 68%. There was an observed benefit of multi-component interventions that either conducted data quality training or that addressed improvement across multiple processes and determinants of RHIS. CONCLUSION: Holistic data quality interventions that address multiple determinants should be continuously practised for strengthening RHIS. Studies with clearly defined and pragmatic outcomes are required for future RHIS improvement interventions. These should be accompanied by qualitative studies and cost analyses to understand which investments are needed to sustain high-quality RHIS in low-income and middle-income countries.


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Health Information Systems , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Income , Poverty
10.
Lancet Glob Health ; 9(3): e280-e290, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33607028

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The WHO Regional Office for the Africa Regional Immunization Technical Advisory Group, in 2011, adopted the measles control and elimination goals for all countries of the African region to achieve in 2015 and 2020 respectively. Our aim was to track the current status of progress towards measles control and elimination milestones across 15 west African countries between 2001 and 2019. METHODS: We did a retrospective multicountry series analysis of national immunisation coverage and case surveillance data from Jan 1, 2001, to Dec 31, 2019. Our analysis focused on the 15 west African countries that constitute the Economic Community of West African States. We tracked progress in the coverage of measles-containing vaccines (MCVs), measles supplementary immunisation activities, and measles incidence rates. We developed a country-level measles summary scorecard using eight indicators to track progress towards measles elimination as of the end of 2019. The summary indicators were tracked against measles control and elimination milestones. FINDINGS: The weighted average regional first-dose MCV coverage in 2019 was 66% compared with 45% in 2001. 73% (11 of 15) of the west African countries had introduced second-dose MCV as of December, 2019. An estimated 4 588 040 children (aged 12-23 months) did not receive first-dose MCV in 2019, the majority (71%) of whom lived in Nigeria. Based on the scorecard, 12 (80%) countries are off-track to achieving measles elimination milestones; however, Cape Verde, The Gambia, and Ghana have made substantial progress. INTERPRETATION: Measles will continue to be endemic in west Africa after 2020. The regional measles incidence rate in 2019 was 33 times the 2020 elimination target of less than 1 case per million population. However, some hope exists as countries can look at the efforts made by Cape Verde, The Gambia, and Ghana and learn from them. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
Disease Eradication/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Measles Vaccine/administration & dosage , Measles/prevention & control , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Africa, Western , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Infant , Population Surveillance , Retrospective Studies
11.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(1)2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33495285

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 epidemic is the latest evidence of critical gaps in our collective ability to monitor country-level preparedness for health emergencies. The global frameworks that exist to strengthen core public health capacities lack coverage of several preparedness domains and do not provide mechanisms to interface with local intelligence. We designed and piloted a process, in collaboration with three National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs) in Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan, to identify potential preparedness indicators that exist in a myriad of frameworks and tools in varying local institutions. Following a desk-based systematic search and expert consultations, indicators were extracted from existing national and subnational health security-relevant frameworks and prioritised in a multi-stakeholder two-round Delphi process. Eighty-six indicators in Ethiopia, 87 indicators in Nigeria and 51 indicators in Pakistan were assessed to be valid, relevant and feasible. From these, 14-16 indicators were prioritised in each of the three countries for consideration in monitoring and evaluation tools. Priority indicators consistently included private sector metrics, subnational capacities, availability and capacity for electronic surveillance, measures of timeliness for routine reporting, data quality scores and data related to internally displaced persons and returnees. NPHIs play an increasingly central role in health security and must have access to data needed to identify and respond rapidly to public health threats. Collecting and collating local sources of information may prove essential to addressing gaps; it is a necessary step towards improving preparedness and strengthening international health regulations compliance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Public Health Surveillance , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Ethiopia , Health Policy , Humans , Nigeria , Pakistan , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Public Health Pract (Oxf) ; 2: 100090, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36101629

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Bilateral Institutional Health Partnerships (IHPs) are a means of strengthening health systems and are becoming increasing prevalent in global health. Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) and Public Health England (PHE) have engaged in one such IHP as part of Public Health England's International Health Regulations Strengthening project. Presently, there have been limited evaluations of IHPs resulting in limited evidence of their effectiveness in strengthening health systems despite the concept being used across the world. Study design: Qualitative, using a validated tool. Methods: The ESTHER EFFECt tool was used to evaluate the IHP between NCDC and PHE. Senior leadership from both organisations participated in a two-day workshop where their perceptions of various elements of the partnership were evaluated. This was done through an initial quantitative survey followed by a facilitated discussion to further explore any arising issues. Results: This evaluation is the first published evaluation of a bilateral global health partnership undertaken by NCDC and PHE. NCDC scores were consistently higher than PHE scores. Key strengths and weaknesses of the partnership were identified such as having wide ranging institutional engagement, however needing to improve dissemination mechanisms following key learning activity. Conclusions: There is a dearth of evidence measuring the effectiveness of international health partnerships; of the studies that exist, many are lacking in academic rigour. We used the ESTHER EFFECt tool as it is an established method of evaluating the progress of the partnership, with multiple previous peer-reviewed publications. This will hopefully encourage more organisations to publish evaluations of their international health partnerships and build the evidence base.

13.
Lancet ; 397(10268): 61-67, 2021 01 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33275906

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed enormous strain on countries around the world, exposing long-standing gaps in public health and exacerbating chronic inequities. Although research and analyses have attempted to draw important lessons on how to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response, few have examined the effect that fragmented governance for health has had on effectively mitigating the crisis. By assessing the ability of health systems to manage COVID-19 from the perspective of two key approaches to global health policy-global health security and universal health coverage-important lessons can be drawn for how to align varied priorities and objectives in strengthening health systems. This Health Policy paper compares three types of health systems (ie, with stronger investments in global health security, stronger investments in universal health coverage, and integrated investments in global health security and universal health coverage) in their response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and synthesises four essential recommendations (ie, integration, financing, resilience, and equity) to reimagine governance, policies, and investments for better health towards a more sustainable future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Global Health , Universal Health Insurance , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans
14.
BMJ Glob Health ; 5(9)2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32994228

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has demonstrated that most countries' public health systems and capacities are insufficiently prepared to prevent a localised infectious disease outbreak from spreading. Strengthening national preparedness requires National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs), or their equivalent, to overcome practical challenges affecting timely access to, and use of, data that is critical to preparedness. Our situational analysis in collaboration with NPHIs in three countries-Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan-characterises these challenges. Our findings indicate that NPHIs' role necessitates collection and analysis of data from multiple sources that do not routinely share data with public health authorities. Since initiating requests for access to new data sources can be a lengthy process, it is essential that NPHIs are routinely monitoring a broad set of priority indicators that are selected to reflect the country-specific context. NPHIs must also have the authority to be able to request rapid sharing of data from public and private sector organisations during health emergencies and to access additional human and financial resources during disease outbreaks. Finally, timely, transparent and informative communication of synthesised data from NPHIs will facilitate sustained data sharing with NPHIs from external organisations. These actions identified by our analysis will support the availability of robust information systems that allow relevant data to be collected, shared and analysed by NPHIs sufficiently rapidly to inform a timely local response to infectious disease outbreaks in the future.


Subject(s)
Access to Information , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Public Health Practice , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Disaster Planning , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Humans , Nigeria/epidemiology , Pakistan/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Vaccine ; 37(17): 2311-2321, 2019 04 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30902482

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Planning and monitoring vaccine introduction and effectiveness relies on strong vaccine-preventable disease (VPD) surveillance. In low and middle-income countries (LMICs) especially, cost is a commonly reported barrier to VPD surveillance system maintenance and performance; however, it is rarely calculated or assessed. This review describes and compares studies on the availability of cost information for VPD surveillance systems in LMICs to facilitate the design of future cost studies of VPD surveillance. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, and EconLit were used to identify peer-reviewed articles and Google was searched for relevant grey literature. Studies selected described characteristics and results of VPD surveillance systems cost studies performed in LMICs. Studies were categorized according to the type of VPD surveillance system, study aim, the annual cost of the system, and per capita costs. RESULTS: Eleven studies were identified that assessed the cost of VPD surveillance systems. The studies assessed systems from six low-income countries, two low-middle-income countries, and three middle-income countries. The majority of the studies (n = 7) were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa and fifteen distinct VPD surveillance systems were assessed across the studies. Most studies aimed to estimate incremental costs of additional surveillance components and presented VPD surveillance system costs as mean annual costs per resource category, health structure level, and by VPD surveillance activity. Staff time/personnel cost represents the largest cost driver, ranging from 21% to 61% of total VPD surveillance system costs across nine studies identifying a cost driver. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a starting point to guide LMICs to invest and advocate for more robust VPD surveillance systems. Critical gaps were identified including limited information on the cost of laboratory surveillance, challenges with costing shared resources, and missing data on capital costs. Appropriate guidance is needed to guide LMICs conducting studies on VPD surveillance system costs.


Subject(s)
Costs and Cost Analysis , Vaccine-Preventable Diseases/epidemiology , Vaccine-Preventable Diseases/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Developing Countries , Health Care Costs , Health Resources/economics , Humans , Public Health Surveillance , Vaccination , Vaccines
20.
Lancet ; 392(10156): 1482-1486, 2018 10 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30343862

ABSTRACT

In the wake of the recent west African Ebola epidemic, there is global consensus on the need for strong health systems; however, agreement is less apparent on effective mechanisms for establishing and maintaining these systems, particularly in resource-constrained settings and in the presence of multiple and sustained stresses (eg, conflict, famine, climate change, and globalisation). The construction of the International Health Regulations (2005) guidelines and the WHO health systems framework, has resulted in the separation of public health functions and health-care services, which are interdependent in actuality and must be integrated to ensure a continuous, unbroken national health system. By analysing efforts to strengthen health systems towards attaining universal health coverage and investments to improve global health security, we examine areas of overlap and offer recommendations for construction of a unified national health system that includes public health. One way towards achieving universal health coverage is to broaden the definition of a health system.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/standards , Global Health , Health Policy/trends , Public Health/standards , Universal Health Insurance/standards , Epidemics/prevention & control , Health Policy/economics , Humans , International Cooperation , Universal Health Insurance/economics , Universal Health Insurance/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...