The cost of inaction on health equity and its social determinants.

Rising levels of inflation, debt and macrofiscal tightening are putting expenditures on the social sectors including health under immense scrutiny. Already, there are worrying signs of reductions in social sector investments. However, even before the pandemic, evidence showed the significant returns on investments in health equity and its social determinants. Emerging data and trends show that these potential returns have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic - investments in social determinants can mitigate widespread reductions in human capital and the increasing likelihood of costly syndemics, while promoting access to healthcare innovations that have thus far been inequitably distributed. Therefore, we argue that, despite immediate fiscal pressures, this is exactly the time to invest in health equity and its broader social determinants, as the returns on such investments have never been greater.

Setting research priorities for global pandemic preparedness: An international consensus and comparison with ChatGPT's output.

Background: In this priority-setting exercise, we sought to identify leading research priorities needed for strengthening future pandemic preparedness and response across countries. Methods: The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to identify research priorities for future pandemic preparedness. Eighty experts in global health, translational and clinical research identified 163 research ideas, of which 42 experts then scored based on five pre-defined criteria. We calculated intermediate criterion-specific scores and overall research priority scores from the mean of individual scores for each research idea. We used a bootstrap (n = 1000) to compute the 95% confidence intervals. Results: Key priorities included strengthening health systems, rapid vaccine and treatment production, improving international cooperation, and enhancing surveillance efficiency. Other priorities included learning from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, managing supply chains, identifying planning gaps, and promoting equitable interventions. We compared this CHNRI-based outcome with the 14 research priorities generated and ranked by ChatGPT, encountering both striking similarities and clear differences. Conclusions: Priority setting processes based on human crowdsourcing - such as the CHNRI method - and the output provided by ChatGPT are both valuable, as they complement and strengthen each other. The priorities identified by ChatGPT were more grounded in theory, while those identified by CHNRI were guided by recent practical experiences. Addressing these priorities, along with improvements in health planning, equitable community-based interventions, and the capacity of primary health care, is vital for better pandemic preparedness and response in many settings.

Global health economics: The Equitable Impact Sensitive Tool (EQUIST) - development, validation, implementation and evaluation of impact (2011 to 2022).

Background: The Equitable Impact Sensitive Tool (EQUIST) was developed to address the limitations of the traditional cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in global health, which often overlooked equity considerations. Its primary aim was to create more effective and efficient health systems by explicitly incorporating equity as a key driver in health policy decisions. This was done in response to the recognition that, while CEA helped reduce mortality rates through interventions like childhood vaccinations, it was insufficient in addressing growing inequalities in health, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: The development of EQUIST involved a multi-stage process which began in 2011 with the recognition of the need for a more nuanced approach than CEA alone. This led to a proposal for creating a tool that balanced cost-effectiveness with equity. The conceptual framework, developed between March and May 2012, included assessments of intervention efficiency by equity strata, effectiveness, impact, and cost-effectiveness. Key to EQUIST's development was its integration with other data science platforms, notably the Lives Saved Tool and the Marginal Budgeting for Bottlenecks tool, allowing EQUIST to draw on comprehensive data sets and thus enabling a more detailed analysis of health interventions' impacts across different socio-economic strata. Results: EQUIST was validated in 2012 through applications in five representative countries, demonstrating its ability to identify more equitable and cost-effective health interventions which targeted vulnerable populations, leading to more lives saved compared to traditional methods. It was then used to develop investment cases for the Global Financing Facility, resulting in significant funding being made available for maternal and child health programmes. Consequently, EQUIST directly influenced the development of national health policies and resource allocations in over 26 African countries. Conclusions: EQUIST has proven to be a valuable tool in developing health policies that are both cost-effective and equitable. In the future, it will be further integrated with other tools and expanded in scope to address broader health issues, including adolescent health and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome programme planning. Overall, EQUIST represents a paradigm shift in global health economics, emphasising the importance of equity alongside cost-effectiveness in health policy decisions. Its development and implementation have had a tangible impact on health outcomes, particularly in LMICs, where it has been instrumental in reducing maternal and child mortality while addressing health inequities.

Health system resilience: a critical review and reconceptualisation.

This Viewpoint brings together insights from health system experts working in a range of settings. Our focus is on examining the state of the resilience field, including current thinking on definitions, conceptualisation, critiques, measurement, and capabilities. We highlight the analytical value of resilience, but also its risks, which include neglect of equity and of who is bearing the costs of resilience strategies. Resilience depends crucially on relationships between system actors and components, and-as amply shown during the COVID-19 pandemic-relationships with wider systems (eg, economic, political, and global governance structures). Resilience is therefore connected to power imbalances, which need to be addressed to enact the transformative strategies that are important in dealing with more persistent shocks and stressors, such as climate change. We discourage the framing of resilience as an outcome that can be measured; instead, we see it emerge from systemic resources and interactions, which have effects that can be measured. We propose a more complex categorisation of shocks than the common binary one of acute versus chronic, and outline some of the implications of this for resilience strategies. We encourage a shift in thinking from capacities towards capabilities-what actors could do in future with the necessary transformative strategies, which will need to encompass global, national, and local change. Finally, we highlight lessons emerging in relation to preparing for the next crisis, particularly in clarifying roles and avoiding fragmented governance.

Adverse birth outcomes among women with 'low-risk' pregnancies in India: findings from the Fifth National Family Health Survey, 2019-21.

Background: Despite substantial progress in improving maternal and newborn health, India continues to experience high rates of newborn mortality and stillbirths. One reason may be that many births happen in health facilities that lack advanced services-such as Caesarean section, blood transfusion, or newborn intensive care. Stratification based on pregnancy risk factors is used to guide 'high-risk' women to advanced facilities. To assess the utility of risk stratification for guiding the choice of facility, we estimated the frequency of adverse newborn outcomes among women classified as 'low risk' in India. Methods: We used the 2019-21 Fifth National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5)-India's Demographic and Health Survey-which includes modules administered to women aged 15-49 years. In addition to pregnancy history and outcomes, the survey collected a range of risk factors, including biomarkers. We used national obstetric risk guidelines to classify women as 'high risk' versus 'low risk' and assessed the frequency of stillbirths, newborn deaths, and unplanned Caesarean sections for the respondent's last pregnancy lasting 7 or more months in the past five years. We calculated the proportion of deliveries occurring at non-hospital facilities in all the Indian states. Findings: Using data from nearly 176,699 recent pregnancies, we found that 46.6% of India's newborn deaths and 56.3% of stillbirths were among women who were 'low risk' according to national guidelines. Women classified as 'low risk' had a Caesarean section rate of 8.4% (95% CI 8.1-8.7%), marginally lower than the national average of 10.0% (95% CI 9.8-10.3%). In India as a whole, 32.0% (95% CI 31.5-32.5%) of deliveries occurred in facilities that were likely to lack advanced services. There was substantial variation across the country, with less than 5% non-hospital public facility deliveries in Punjab, Kerala, and Delhi compared to more than 40% in Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan. Newborn mortality tended to be lower in states with highest hospital delivery rates. Interpretation: Individual risk stratification based on factors identified in pregnancy fails to accurately predict which women will have delivery complications and experience stillbirth and newborn death in India. Thus a determination of 'low risk' should not be used to guide women to health facilities lacking key life saving services, including Caesarean section, blood transfusion, and advanced newborn resuscitation and care. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in the paper are entirely those of the authors, and do not represent the views of the Gates Foundation or of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.

Modelling the economic burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health care workers in four countries.

Health care workers (HCWs) experienced greater risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study applies a cost-of-illness (COI) approach to model the economic burden associated with SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCWs in five low- and middle-income sites (Kenya, Eswatini, Colombia, KwaZulu-Natal province, and Western Cape province of South Africa) during the first year of the pandemic. We find that not only did HCWs have a higher incidence of COVID-19 than the general population, but in all sites except Colombia, viral transmission from infected HCWs to close contacts resulted in substantial secondary SARS-CoV-2 infection and death. Disruption in health services as a result of HCW illness affected maternal and child deaths dramatically. Total economic losses attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs as a share of total health expenditure ranged from 1.51% in Colombia to 8.38% in Western Cape province, South Africa. This economic burden to society highlights the importance of adequate infection prevention and control measures to minimize the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs.

Digital Health in Response to COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-income Countries: Opportunities and Challenges.

COVID-19 has pulled back the curtain on health system fragility to expose persistent and deepening inequities worldwide. The limited capacity of low- and lower-middle income countries (LMICs) to respond to the pandemic and its impact on the health of populations - particularly the most vulnerable - presents a marked challenge. In this context, countries face the enormous task of rethinking the way essential services will be delivered. A critical and essential part of solving these challenges will be using information and communication technology and digital health to enhance direct communication with the public; scale proven and innovative service delivery models; and empower the frontlines. However, if the deployment, adaptation, or expansion of these innovations are not user-centered for the most marginalized or do not learn from past lessons, it could be highly wasteful at best. At worst, such shortcomings could exacerbate pre-existing weaknesses in the health care system such as exclusion of peripheral populations, disempowerment of health workers, and proliferation of unregulated private providers. We provide recommendations of which innovations should be prioritized and implementation principles to address the current challenges while responding to the need to fundamentally change service delivery for accelerated impact.

Improving health service delivery in conflict-affected settings: Lessons from a nationwide strategic purchasing mechanism in Afghanistan.

BACKGROUND: Due to ongoing insecurity, the government of Afghanistan delivers health care to the country's population by contracting out service delivery to non-governmental organization service providers (SPs). In 2018, major changes to SP contracts were introduced, resulting in a new pay-for-performance service delivery model. This model, called "Sehatmandi", pays SPs based on the volume of 11 key services they provide. METHODS: A narrative review of Sehatmandi's key features is presented, as well as lessons learned during implementation. Counterfactual comparisons of service delivery data for 10 payment-related service indicators are made. The first comparison is between the rate of change in the volume of services delivered from 2018 to 2019 (ie, the first year of Sehatmandi implementation) relative to the rate change from 2017 to 2018 (ie, prior to the program). The second comparison is between the rate of change in the volume of services delivered in provinces under the pay-for-performance mechanism relative to provinces which were not financed using pay-for-performance. Time trends in non-payment service indicators and service quality are also examined. RESULTS: The increase in service volume in Sehatmandi provinces from 2018 to 2019 was higher than the increase from 2017 to 2018 for 8 out of 10 indicators. The median increase in the rate of change was 10 percentage points. Similar results were obtained when comparing pay-for-performance provinces to those not financed using pay-for-performance. Improvements were also observed for services that were not directly compensated by the pay-for-performance approach. Payment for service volume was not associated with reduced service quality. The narrative review suggests that the pay-for-performance system has stimulated more effective oversight of SPs by the government of Afghanistan and has incentivized innovative service delivery strategies by SPs. Sehatmandi may benefit from re-structuring its financial incentives to stimulate improved service quality and accelerate delivery of lagging services. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence - though subject to some limitations - suggests that the introduction of a pay-for-performance system was associated with an expanded volume of service delivery in Afghanistan. This approach may be beneficial in other conflict-affected countries.

Using evidence, expert opinion and epidemiological model to understand pathways to survival and mortality: The Pathways to Survival (PATHS) Tool.

BACKGROUND: The reasons why episodes of illness can lead to fatal outcomes in affected persons in low resource settings are numerous and complex. A tool that allows policy makers to better understand those complexities could be useful to improve success of programmes that are implemented globally to reduce mortality. METHODS: We developed a "Pathways to Survival" (PATHS) tool: an epidemiological model using decision trees, available evidence and expert opinion. PATHS visualises the "architecture" of mortality in the population by following the entire population cohort over a certain period of time. It explains how initially healthy persons progress through health systems to lethal outcomes at the end of the specified time period. We developed an illustrative example based on the 136 million newborns and an estimated 907 000 deaths from newborn sepsis in the year 2008. This allowed us to develop an epidemiological model that described pathways to deaths from neonatal sepsis globally in 2010. RESULTS: The model described the "status quo' situation in 2010 with 907 000 deaths to allow an assessment of the potential impact and feasibility of different interventions and programmes at various level of health systems in reducing this cause of mortality. A useful model should incorporate both a 'horizontal' and a 'vertical' component. The 'horizontal' would track the progress of all neonates globally through time, ie, their first 28 days of life, and separate them into different 'pathways' every time a change in their risk of dying from neonatal infection occurs because of their specific contextual circumstances. The 'vertical' would track their position within the health systems of their countries and separate them into different categories based on the ability of health system to intervene and reduce their risk of dying. Based on those requirements, PATHS tool was developed which is based on decision trees where different "branches" of the trees are associated with varying case-fatality rates. CONCLUSIONS: The application of the PATHS tool on the example of newborn sepsis revealed that novel diagnostic tests could save many lives, so we should continue to invest in them to improve their validity, deliverability and affordability. However, PATHS showed that investments in better diagnostics have limited impact unless they are coupled with improvements of the context. Programs for parental education improve compliance and care seeking. Promoting legislation change to empower community health workers (CHWs) to actively engage in prevention, diagnosis and care also makes a difference, as well as programs for training CHWs to use diagnostic tests and administer treatments correctly. Care-seeking behaviour can also be improved through programs of conditional cash transfers. Finally, PATHS demonstrated that improving access to primary and secondary health care for everyone is the most powerful contextual change.

Are rhetorical commitments to adolescents reflected in planning documents? An exploratory content analysis of adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Global Financing Facility country plans.

BACKGROUND: The Global Financing Facility (GFF) offers an opportunity to close the financing gap that holds back gains in women, children's and adolescent health. However, very little work exists examining GFF practice, particularly for adolescent health. As momentum builds for the GFF, we examine initial GFF planning documents to inform future national and multi-lateral efforts to advance adolescent sexual and reproductive health. METHODS: We undertook a content analysis of the first 11 GFF Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents available on the GFF website. The countries involved include Bangladesh, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kenya, Liberia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda. RESULTS: While several country documents signal understanding and investment in adolescents as a strategic area, this is not consistent across all countries, nor between Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents. In both types of documents commitments weaken as one moves from programming content to indicators to investment. Important contributions include how teenage pregnancy is a universal concern, how adolescent and youth friendly health services and school-based programs are supported in several country documents, how gender is noted as a key social determinant critical for mainstreaming across the health system, alongside the importance of multi-sectoral collaboration, and the acknowledgement of adolescent rights. Weaknesses include the lack of comprehensive analysis of adolescent health needs, inconsistent investments in adolescent friendly health services and school based programs, missed opportunities in not supporting multi-component and multi-level initiatives to change gender norms involving adolescent boys in addition to adolescent girls, and neglect of governance approaches to broker effective multi-sectoral collaboration, community engagement and adolescent involvement. CONCLUSION: There are important examples of how the GFF supports adolescents and their sexual and reproductive health. However, more can be done. While building on service delivery approaches more consistently, it must also fund initiatives that address the main social and systems drivers of adolescent health. This requires capacity building for the technical aspects of adolescent health, but also engaging politically to ensure that the right actors are convened to prioritize adolescent health in country plans and to ensure accountability in the GFF process itself.

Correction to: Identifying and treating maternal mental health difficulties in Afghanistan: A feasibility study.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Identifying and treating maternal mental health difficulties in Afghanistan: A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The disproportionately high burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries, coupled with the overwhelming lack of resources, requires an innovative approach to intervention and response. This study evaluated the feasibility of delivering a maternal mental health service in a severely-resource constrained setting as part of routine service delivery. METHODS: This exploratory feasibility study was undertaken at two health facilities in Afghanistan that did not have specialist mental health workers. Women who had given birth in the past 12 months were screened for depressive symptoms with the PHQ9 and invited to participate in a psychological intervention which was offered through an infant feeding scheme. RESULTS: Of the 215 women screened, 131 (60.9%) met the PHQ9 criteria for referral to the intervention. The screening prevalence of postnatal depression was 61%, using a PHQ9 cut-off score of 12. Additionally, 29% of women registered as suicidal on the PHQ9. Several demographic and psychosocial variables were associated with depressive symptoms in this sample, including nutritional status of the infant, anxiety symptoms, vegetative and mood symptoms, marital difficulties, intimate partner violence, social isolation, acute stress and experience of trauma. Of the 47 (65%) women who attended all six sessions of the intervention, all had significantly decreased PHQ9 scores post-intervention. CONCLUSION: In poorly resourced environments, where the prevalence of postnatal depression is high, a shift in response from specialist-based to primary health care-level intervention may be a viable way to provide maternal mental health care. It is recommended that such programmes also consider home-visiting components and be integrated into existing infant and child health programmes. Manualised, evidence-based psychological interventions, delivered by non-specialist health workers, can improve outcomes where resources are scarce.