Identifying priority double-duty actions to tackle the double burden of malnutrition in infants and young children in Peru: Assessment and prioritisation of government actions by national experts.

Multiple forms of malnutrition coexist in infants and young children (IYC) in Peru. The World Health Organization has proposed double-duty actions (DDAs) to simultaneously address undernutrition and overweight/obesity. We assessed current implementation of- and priority for- government-level actions to tackle multiple forms of malnutrition in IYC in Peru. Mapping of current policy activity was undertaken against 47 indicators of good practice for five DDAs (exclusive breastfeeding, complementary feeding, food marketing, maternal nutrition, preschool nutrition; assessed by 27 indicators) and for the enabling policy environment, i.e., 'infrastructure support' (health in all policies, platforms for interactions, financing, monitoring, governance, leadership; assessed by 20 indicators). Interviews with 16 national experts explored views on the level of and barriers to implementation of DDAs and infrastructure support, as well as their prioritisation based on likely impact and feasibility. The level of implementation of actions was categorised into two groups (agenda setting/formulation vs. implementation/evaluation). Mean scores were generated for prioritisation of DDAs and infrastructure support. Deductive qualitative analysis was undertaken to identify barriers that influence policy implementation. Only 5/27 DDA indicators were reported as fully implemented by all national experts (international code that regulates the marketing of breastmilk substitutes, iron supplementation for IYC, micronutrient powders in IYC, iron/folic acid supplementation in pregnant women, paid maternity leave). Only 1/20 infrastructure support indicator (access to nutrition information) was rated as fully implemented by all experts. Barriers to implementing DDAs and infrastructure support included: legal feasibility or lack of regulations, inadequate monitoring/evaluation to ensure enforcement, commercial influences on policymakers, insufficient resources, shifting public health priorities with the COVID-19 pandemic and political instability. The experts prioritised 12 indicators across all five DDAs and eight infrastructure support indicators. Experts highlighted the need to improve implementation of all DDAs and identified ways to strengthen the enabling policy environment.

Identification of the needs and priorities of older people and stakeholders in rural and urban areas of Santo Andre, Brazil.

BACKGROUND: There are few data reporting the needs and priorities of older adults in Brazil. This hampers the development and/or implementation of policies aimed at older adults to help them age well. The aim of this study was to understand areas of importance, priorities, enablers and obstacles to healthy ageing as identified by older adults and key stakeholders in both urban and rural environments. METHODS: Two locations were selected, one urban and one rural in the municipality of Santo André, in the metropolitan region of São Paulo (SP). Workshops for older adults (>60 y) and stakeholders were conducted separately in each location. The workshops incorporated an iterative process of discussion, prioritisation and ranking of responses, in roundtable groups and in plenary. Areas of commonality and differences between older adult and stakeholder responses were identified by comparing responses between groups as well as mapping obstacles and enablers to healthy ageing identified by older adults, to the priorities identified by stakeholder groups. The socio-ecologic model was used to categorise responses. RESULTS: There were few shared responses between stakeholders and older adults and little overlap between the top ranked responses of urban and rural groups. With respect to areas of importance, both stakeholder groups ranked policies for older people within their top five reponses. Both older adult groups ranked keeping physically and mentally active, and nurturing spirituality. There was a marked lack of congruence between older adults' obstacles and enablers to healthy ageing and stakeholder priorities, in both urban and rural settings. Most responses were located within the Society domain of the socio-ecologic model, although older adults also responded within the Individual/ Relationships domains, particularly in ranking areas of most importance for healthy ageing. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight substantial differences between older adults and stakeholders with respect to areas of importance, priorities, enablers and obstacles to healthy ageing, and point to the need for more engagement between those in advocacy and policymaking roles and the older people whose needs they serve.

Priorities for health outcomes in glaucoma in an ethnically diverse UK cohort: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether patients from minority ethnic groups have different perceptions about the quality-of-life outcomes that matter most to them. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: High volume eye centres serving the most ethnically diverse region in the UK, recruiting from July 2021 to February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 511 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and the predisease state of ocular hypertension. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was participants' self-reported priorities for health outcomes. RESULTS: Participants fell into one of four clusters with differing priorities for health outcomes, namely: (1) vision, (2) drop freedom, (3) intraocular pressure and (4) one-time treatment. Ethnicity was the strongest determinant of cluster membership after adjusting for potential confounders. Compared with white patients prioritising vision alone, the OR for black/black British patients was 7.31 (95% CI 3.43 to 15.57, p<0.001) for prioritising drop freedom; 5.95 (2.91 to 12.16, p<0.001) for intraocular pressure; and 2.99 (1.44 to 6.18, p=0.003) for one-time treatment. For Asian/Asian British patients, the OR was 3.17 (1.12 to 8.96, p=0.030) for prioritising intraocular pressure as highly as vision. Other ethnic minority groups also had higher ORs for prioritising health outcomes other than vision alone: 4.50 (1.03 to 19.63, p=0.045) for drop freedom and 5.37 (1.47 to 19.60, p=0.011) for intraocular pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnicity is strongly associated with differing perceptions about the health outcomes that matter. An individualised and ethnically inclusive approach is needed when selecting and evaluating treatments in clinical and research settings.

Research priorities for the management of major trauma: an international priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine research priorities for the management of major trauma, representing the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/SETTING: An international research priority-setting partnership. PARTICIPANTS: People who have experienced major trauma, their carers and relatives, and healthcare professionals involved in treating patients after major trauma. The scope included chest, abdominal and pelvic injuries as well as major bleeding, multiple injuries and those that threaten life or limb. METHODS: A multiphase priority-setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 24 months (November 2021-October 2023). An international survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second international survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 19 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: A total of 1572 uncertainties, submitted by 417 respondents (including 132 patients and carers), were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 53 unique indicative questions, of which all 53 were judged to be true uncertainties after reviewing the existing evidence. 373 people (including 115 patients and carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 19 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 research priorities for major trauma include patient-centred questions regarding pain relief and prehospital management, multidisciplinary working, novel technologies, rehabilitation and holistic support. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research major trauma around the globe.

Design of a multiple criteria decision analysis framework for prioritizing high-impact health technologies in a regional health service.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to develop a framework for establishing priorities in the regional health service of Murcia, Spain, to facilitate the creation of a comprehensive multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. This framework will aid in decision-making processes related to the assessment, reimbursement, and utilization of high-impact health technologies. METHOD: Based on the results of a review of existing frameworks for MCDA of health technologies, a set of criteria was proposed to be used in the context of evaluating high-impact health technologies. Key stakeholders within regional healthcare services, including clinical leaders and management personnel, participated in a focus group (n = 11) to discuss the proposed criteria and select the final fifteen. To elicit the weights of the criteria, two surveys were administered, one to a small sample of healthcare professionals (n = 35) and another to a larger representative sample of the general population (n = 494). RESULTS: The responses obtained from health professionals in the weighting procedure exhibited greater consistency compared to those provided by the general public. The criteria more highly weighted were "Need for intervention" and "Intervention outcomes." The weights finally assigned to each item in the multicriteria framework were derived as the equal-weighted sum of the mean weights from the two samples. CONCLUSIONS: A multi-attribute function capable of generating a composite measure (multicriteria) to assess the value of high-impact health interventions has been developed. Furthermore, it is recommended to pilot this procedure in a specific decision context to evaluate the efficacy, feasibility, usefulness, and reliability of the proposed tool.

Using a priority setting exercise to identify priorities for guidelines on newborn and child health in South Africa, Malawi, and Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Sub-Saharan Africa is the region with the highest under-five mortality rate globally. Child healthcare decisions should be based on rigorously developed evidence-informed guidelines. The Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project is enhancing capacity to use global research to develop locally relevant guidelines for newborn and child health in South Africa (SA), Malawi, and Nigeria. The first step in this process was to identify national priorities for newborn and child health guideline development, and this paper describes our approach. METHODS: We followed a good practice method for priority setting, including stakeholder engagement, online priority setting surveys and consensus meetings, conducted separately in South Africa, Malawi and Nigeria. We established national Steering Groups (SG), comprising 10-13 members representing government, academia, and other stakeholders, identified through existing contacts and references, who helped prioritise initial topics identified by research teams and oversaw the process. Various stakeholders were consulted via online surveys to rate the importance of topics, with results informing consensus meetings with SGs where final priority topics were agreed. RESULTS: Based on survey results, nine, 10 and 11 topics were identified in SA, Malawi, and Nigeria respectively, which informed consensus meetings. Through voting and discussion within meetings, and further engagement after the meetings, the top three priority topics were identified in each country. In SA, the topics concerned anemia prevention in infants and young children and post-discharge support for caregivers of preterm and LBW babies. In Malawi, they focused on enteral nutrition in critically ill children, diagnosis of childhood cancers in the community, and caring for neonates. In Nigeria, the topics focused on identifying pre-eclampsia in the community, hand hygiene compliance to prevent infections, and enteral nutrition for LBW and preterm infants. CONCLUSIONS: Through dynamic and iterative stakeholder engagement, we identified three priority topics for guideline development on newborn and child health in SA, Malawi and Nigeria. Topics were specific to contexts, with no overlap, which highlights the importance of contextualised priority setting as well as of the relationships with key decisionmakers who help define the priorities.

Global respiratory health priorities at the beginning of the 21st century.

Respiratory health has become a prevailing priority amid the diverse global health challenges that the 21st century brings, due to its substantial impact on individuals and communities on a global scale. Due to rapid advances in medicine, emerging knowledge gaps appear along with new challenges and ethical considerations. While breakthroughs in medical science can bring about encouraging possibilities for better treatments and interventions, they also lead to unanswered questions and areas where further research is warranted. A PubMed search on the topic "global respiratory health priorities" between the years 2000 and 2023 was conducted, which returned 236 articles. Of these, 55 were relevant and selected for inclusion in this article. The selection process took into account literature reviews, opinions from expert groups and careful analysis of existing gaps and challenges within the field; our selection encompasses specific infectious and noninfectious respiratory conditions in both adults and children. The global respiratory health priorities identified were selected on the basis that they have been recognised as critical areas of investigation and potential advancement and they span across clinical, translational, epidemiological and population health domains. Implementing these priorities will require a commitment to fostering collaboration and knowledge-sharing among experts in different fields with the ultimate aim to improve respiratory health outcomes for individuals and communities alike.

Needs assessment in long-term care: expression of national principles for priority setting in service allocation.

BACKGROUND: Long-term care services for older adults are characterised by increasing needs and scarce resources. Political strategies have led to the reorganisation of long-term care services, with an increased focus on "ageing in place" and efficient use of resources. There is currently limited research on the processes by which resource allocation decisions are made by service allocators of long-term care services for older adults. The aim of this study is to explore how three political principles for priority setting in long-term care, resource, severity and benefit, are expressed in service allocation to older adults. METHODS: This qualitative study uses data from semi-structured individual interviews, focus groups and observations of service allocators who assess needs and assign long-term care services to older adults in Norway. The data were supplemented with individual decision letters from the allocation office, granting or denying long-term care services. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The allocators drew on all three principles for priority setting when assessing older adults' long-term care needs and allocating services. We found that the three principles pushed in different directions in the allocation process. We identified six themes related to service allocators' expression of the principles: (1) lowest effective level of care as a criterion for service allocation (resource), (2) blanket allocation of low-cost care services (resource), (3) severity of medical and rehabilitation needs (severity), (4) severity of care needs (severity), (5) benefit of generous service allocation (benefit) and (6) benefit of avoiding services (benefit). CONCLUSIONS: The expressions of the three political principles for priority setting in long-term care allocation are in accordance with broader political trends and discourses regarding "ageing in place", active ageing, an investment ideology, and prioritising those who are "worse off". Increasing attention to the rehabilitation potential of older adults and expectations that they will take care of themselves increase the risk of not meeting frail older adults' care needs. Additionally, difficulties in defining the severity of older adults' complex needs lead to debates regarding "worse off" versus potentiality in future long-term care services allocation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Prioritization of maternal and newborn health policies and their implementation in the eastern conflict affected areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo: a political economy analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maternal and neonatal mortality remains a major concern in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and the country's protracted crisis context exacerbates the problem. This political economy analysis examines the maternal and newborn health (MNH) prioritization in the DRC, focussing specifically on the conflict-affected regions of North and South Kivu. The aim is to understand the factors that facilitate or hinder the prioritization of MNH policy development and implementation by the Congolese government and other key actors at national level and in the provinces of North and South Kivu. METHODS: Using a health policy triangle framework, data collection consisted of in-depth interviews with key actors at different levels of the health system, combined with a desk review. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive and then deductive approaches, exploring the content, process, actor dynamics, contextual factors and gender-related factors influencing MNH policy development and implementation. RESULTS: The study highlighted the challenges of prioritizing policies in the face of competing health and security emergencies, limited resources and governance issues. The universal health coverage policy seems to offer hope for improving access to MNH services. Results also revealed the importance of international partnerships and global financial mechanisms in the development of MNH strategies. They reveal huge gender disparities in the MNH sector at all levels, and the need to consider cultural factors that can positively or negatively impact the success of MNH policies in crisis zones. CONCLUSIONS: MNH is a high priority in DRC, yet implementation faces hurdles due to financial constraints, political influences, conflicts and gender disparities. Addressing these challenges requires tailored community-based strategies, political engagement, support for health personnel and empowerment of women in crisis areas for better MNH outcomes.

Research prioritization in paediatric orthopaedics and the impact on funding.

In 2017, the British Society for Children's Orthopaedic Surgery engaged the profession and all relevant stakeholders in two formal research prioritization processes. In this editorial, we describe the impact of this prioritization on funding, and how research in children's orthopaedics, which was until very recently a largely unfunded and under-investigated area, is now flourishing. Establishing research priorities was a crucial step in this process.

Research priorities in trans health: a Delphi-study.

Purpose: Progress has been made in understanding trans health needs, but research priorities are often set by policy or healthcare professionals without trans input, which may not reflect public needs. Our study sought to identify trans health research priorities in France from both researchers and the trans community. Methods: Expert stakeholders (health and social sciences professionals, trans individuals, and their families) answered a three-round Delphi survey on trans health research priorities. The first round involved an open-ended questionnaire, analyzed qualitatively. In the second round, participants ranked research propositions from round one using a Likert scale. The study's second phase involved a two-hour workshop with experts and trans individuals. Results: 53 participants (32% trans individuals/relatives, 60% health professionals) contributed 217 responses to open-ended questions, leading to 44 research priorities. After the two voting rounds, a total of five proposals reached a strong consensus cut-off and were considered as the main research priorities: evaluation of the effect of puberty blocker use in trans children and adolescents (95%), evaluation of the effect of supporting trans children and adolescents (92%), study of the support systems available for trans youth and their parents (86%), persistence of trans identity around puberty (prevalence, persistent persons characteristics) (86%), and needs assessment survey of the support for adolescents and their families (83%). Thirteen other proposals were considered moderate priorities. Conclusion: The main consensus in our French study concerned research on trans-youth care and support needs. Our results may guide further trans-health research that meets the public's needs and desires.