Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). METHODS: Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. RESULTS: We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

Healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of primary healthcare integration: a scoping review of qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare (PHC) integration has been promoted globally as a tool for health sector reform and universal health coverage (UHC), especially in low-resource settings. However, for a range of reasons, implementation and impact remain variable. PHC integration, at its simplest, can be considered a way of delivering PHC services together that sometimes have been delivered as a series of separate or 'vertical' health programmes. Healthcare workers are known to shape the success of implementing reform interventions. Understanding healthcare worker perceptions and experiences of PHC integration can therefore provide insights into the role healthcare workers play in shaping implementation efforts and the impact of PHC integration. However, the heterogeneity of the evidence base complicates our understanding of their role in shaping the implementation, delivery, and impact of PHC integration, and the role of contextual factors influencing their responses. OBJECTIVES: To map the qualitative literature on healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of PHC integration to characterise the evidence base, with a view to better inform future syntheses on the topic. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 28 July 2020. We did not search for grey literature due to the many published records identified. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies with qualitative and mixed methods designs that reported on healthcare worker perceptions and experiences of PHC integration from any country. We excluded settings other than PHC and community-based health care, participants other than healthcare workers, and interventions broader than healthcare services. We used translation support from colleagues and Google Translate software to screen non-English records. Where translation was not feasible we categorised these records as studies awaiting classification. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For data extraction, we used a customised data extraction form containing items developed using inductive and deductive approaches. We performed independent extraction in duplicate for a sample on 10% of studies allowed for sufficient agreement to be reached between review authors. We analysed extracted data quantitatively by counting the number of studies per indicator and converting these into proportions with additional qualitative descriptive information. Indicators included descriptions of study methods, country setting, intervention type, scope and strategies, implementing healthcare workers, and client target population. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 184 studies for analysis based on 191 included papers. Most studies were published in the last 12 years, with a sharp increase in the last five years. Studies mostly employed methods with cross-sectional qualitative design (mainly interviews and focus group discussions), and few used longitudinal or ethnographic (or both) designs. Studies covered 37 countries, with close to an even split in the proportions of high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There were gaps in the geographical spread for both HICs and LMICs and some countries were more dominant, such as the USA for HICs, South Africa for middle-income countries, and Uganda for low-income countries. Methods were mainly cross-sectional observational studies with few longitudinal studies. A minority of studies used an analytical conceptual model to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of the integration study. The main finding was the various levels of diversity found in the evidence base on PHC integration studies that examined healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences. The review identified six different configurations of health service streams that were being integrated and these were categorised as: mental and behavioural health; HIV, tuberculosis (TB) and sexual reproductive health; maternal, women, and child health; non-communicable diseases; and two broader categories, namely general PHC services, and allied and specialised services. Within the health streams, the review mapped the scope of the interventions as full or partial integration. The review mapped the use of three different integration strategies and categorised these as horizontal integration, service expansion, and service linkage strategies. The wide range of healthcare workers who participated in the implementation of integration interventions was mapped and these included policymakers, senior managers, middle and frontline managers, clinicians, allied healthcare professionals, lay healthcare workers, and health system support staff. We mapped the range of client target populations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review provides a systematic, descriptive overview of the heterogeneity in qualitative literature on healthcare workers' perceptions and experience of PHC integration, pointing to diversity with regard to country settings; study types; client populations; healthcare worker populations; and intervention focus, scope, and strategies. It would be important for researchers and decision-makers to understand how the diversity in PHC integration intervention design, implementation, and context may influence how healthcare workers shape PHC integration impact. The classification of studies on the various dimensions (e.g. integration focus, scope, strategy, and type of healthcare workers and client populations) can help researchers to navigate the way the literature varies and for specifying potential questions for future qualitative evidence syntheses.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of primary healthcare integration: a scoping review of qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare (PHC) integration has been promoted globally as a tool for health sector reform and universal health coverage (UHC), especially in low-resource settings. However, for a range of reasons, implementation and impact remain variable. PHC integration, at its simplest, can be considered a way of delivering PHC services together that sometimes have been delivered as a series of separate or 'vertical' health programmes. Healthcare workers are known to shape the success of implementing reform interventions. Understanding healthcare worker perceptions and experiences of PHC integration can therefore provide insights into the role healthcare workers play in shaping implementation efforts and the impact of PHC integration. However, the heterogeneity of the evidence base complicates our understanding of their role in shaping the implementation, delivery, and impact of PHC integration, and the role of contextual factors influencing their responses. OBJECTIVES: To map the qualitative literature on healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of PHC integration to characterise the evidence base, with a view to better inform future syntheses on the topic. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 28 July 2020. We did not search for grey literature due to the many published records identified. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies with qualitative and mixed methods designs that reported on healthcare worker perceptions and experiences of PHC integration from any country. We excluded settings other than PHC and community-based health care, participants other than healthcare workers, and interventions broader than healthcare services. We used translation support from colleagues and Google Translate software to screen non-English records. Where translation was not feasible we categorised these records as studies awaiting classification. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For data extraction, we used a customised data extraction form containing items developed using inductive and deductive approaches. We performed independent extraction in duplicate for a sample on 10% of studies allowed for sufficient agreement to be reached between review authors. We analysed extracted data quantitatively by counting the number of studies per indicator and converting these into proportions with additional qualitative descriptive information. Indicators included descriptions of study methods, country setting, intervention type, scope and strategies, implementing healthcare workers, and client target population. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 184 studies for analysis based on 191 included papers. Most studies were published in the last 12 years, with a sharp increase in the last five years. Studies mostly employed methods with cross-sectional qualitative design (mainly interviews and focus group discussions), and few used longitudinal or ethnographic (or both) designs. Studies covered 37 countries, with close to an even split in the proportions of high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There were gaps in the geographical spread for both HICs and LMICs and some countries were more dominant, such as the USA for HICs, South Africa for middle-income countries, and Uganda for low-income countries. Methods were mainly cross-sectional observational studies with few longitudinal studies. A minority of studies used an analytical conceptual model to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of the integration study. The main finding was the various levels of diversity found in the evidence base on PHC integration studies that examined healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences. The review identified six different configurations of health service streams that were being integrated and these were categorised as: mental and behavioural health; HIV, tuberculosis (TB) and sexual reproductive health; maternal, women, and child health; non-communicable diseases; and two broader categories, namely general PHC services, and allied and specialised services. Within the health streams, the review mapped the scope of the interventions as full or partial integration. The review mapped the use of three different integration strategies and categorised these as horizontal integration, service expansion, and service linkage strategies. The wide range of healthcare workers who participated in the implementation of integration interventions was mapped and these included policymakers, senior managers, middle and frontline managers, clinicians, allied healthcare professionals, lay healthcare workers, and health system support staff. We mapped the range of client target populations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review provides a systematic, descriptive overview of the heterogeneity in qualitative literature on healthcare workers' perceptions and experience of PHC integration, pointing to diversity with regard to country settings; study types; client populations; healthcare worker populations; and intervention focus, scope, and strategies. It would be important for researchers and decision-makers to understand how the diversity in PHC integration intervention design, implementation, and context may influence how healthcare workers shape PHC integration impact. The classification of studies on the various dimensions (e.g. integration focus, scope, strategy, and type of healthcare workers and client populations) can help researchers to navigate the way the literature varies and for specifying potential questions for future qualitative evidence syntheses.

ANTECEDENTES: La integración de la atención primaria de salud (APS) se ha promovido en todo el mundo como herramienta para la mejora del sector sanitario y la cobertura sanitaria universal (CSU), especialmente en contextos con pocos recursos. Sin embargo, por diversas razones, la aplicación y el impacto todavía son variables. La integración de la APS, en su forma más simple, se puede considerar una forma de prestar conjuntamente servicios de APS que en ocasiones se han prestado como una serie de programas sanitarios separados o "verticales". Se sabe que el personal sanitario determina el éxito de la aplicación de las intervenciones de mejora. Por lo tanto, conocer las percepciones y experiencias de los trabajadores sanitarios sobre la integración de la APS puede ayudar a comprender la función que desempeñan en la configuración de los esfuerzos para la aplicación y el impacto de la integración de la APS. Sin embargo, la heterogeneidad de la base de evidencia complica la comprensión de su función en la configuración de la aplicación, la prestación y el impacto de la integración de la APS, así como el papel de los factores contextuales que influyen en sus respuestas. OBJETIVOS: Identificar la literatura cualitativa sobre las percepciones y experiencias del personal sanitario en relación con la integración de la APS para caracterizar la base de evidencia, con vistas a informar mejor las futuras síntesis sobre el tema. MÉTODOS DE BÚSQUEDA: Se utilizaron los métodos exhaustivos estándar de búsqueda de Cochrane. La última fecha de búsqueda fue el 28 de julio de 2020. No se buscó literatura gris debido a los numerosos registros publicados identificados. CRITERIOS DE SELECCIÓN: Se incluyeron estudios con diseños cualitativos y de métodos mixtos que informaran sobre las percepciones y experiencias de los profesionales sanitarios sobre la integración de la APS de cualquier país. Se excluyeron los contextos distintos de la APS y la atención sanitaria comunitaria, los participantes que no fueran profesionales sanitarios y las intervenciones que abarcaran más que los servicios sanitarios. Para revisar los registros que no estaban en inglés se contó con la traducción realizada con la ayuda de colegas y el programa Google Translate. En los casos en que la traducción no fue posible, estos registros se clasificaron como estudios pendientes de clasificación. OBTENCIÓN Y ANÁLISIS DE LOS DATOS: Para la extracción de los datos, se utilizó un formulario de extracción de datos personalizado que contenía ítems elaborados mediante enfoques inductivos y deductivos. La extracción independiente por duplicado de una muestra del 10% de los estudios permitió alcanzar un acuerdo suficiente entre los autores de la revisión. Los datos extraídos se analizaron cuantitativamente contando el número de estudios por indicador y convirtiéndolos en proporciones con información descriptiva cualitativa adicional. Los indicadores incluían descripciones de los métodos de estudio, el contexto del país, el tipo de intervención, el alcance y las estrategias, el personal sanitario encargado de aplicarla y la población destinataria. RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES: La revisión incluyó 184 estudios para el análisis sobre la base de 191 documentos incluidos. La mayoría de los estudios se publicaron en los últimos 12 años, con un fuerte aumento en los últimos cinco. La mayoría de los estudios emplearon métodos con un diseño cualitativo transversal (principalmente entrevistas y debates en grupos de discusión), y pocos utilizaron diseños longitudinales o etnográficos (o ambos). Los estudios abarcaron 37 países, con una proporción casi equitativa de países de ingresos altos (PIA) y países de ingresos bajos y medios (PIBM). Tanto en los PIA como en los PIBM, la distribución geográfica presentaba carencias y algunos países eran más dominantes, como EE. UU. en los países de ingresos altos, Sudáfrica en los de ingresos medios y Uganda en los de ingresos bajos. Los métodos fueron principalmente estudios observacionales transversales con pocos estudios longitudinales. Una minoría de estudios utilizó un modelo conceptual analítico para orientar el diseño, la aplicación y la evaluación del estudio de integración. El principal hallazgo fue los distintos niveles de diversidad encontrados en la base de evidencia sobre estudios de integración de la APS que examinaron las percepciones y experiencias de los trabajadores sanitarios. La revisión identificó seis configuraciones diferentes de flujos de servicios sanitarios que se estaban integrando y que se clasificaron como: salud mental y del comportamiento; VIH, tuberculosis (TB) y salud sexual y reproductiva; salud materna, de la mujer y del niño; enfermedades no transmisibles; y dos categorías más amplias, a saber, servicios generales de APS y servicios afines y especializados. Dentro de los flujos sanitarios, la revisión clasificó el alcance de las intervenciones como integración total o parcial. La revisión identificó el uso de tres estrategias de integración diferentes y las clasificó como estrategias de integración horizontal, ampliación de los servicios y vinculación de los servicios. Se identificó el amplio abanico de profesionales sanitarios que participaron en la aplicación de las intervenciones de integración: responsables de políticas sanitarias, altos directivos, directivos intermedios y de primera línea, médicos, profesionales sanitarios asociados, trabajadores sanitarios no técnicos y personal de apoyo de los sistemas sanitarios. Se identificó la variedad de poblaciones destinatarias. CONCLUSIONES DE LOS AUTORES: Esta revisión sistemática exploratoria proporciona una revisión global sistemática y descriptiva de la heterogeneidad de la bibliografía cualitativa sobre las percepciones y experiencias de los profesionales sanitarios con respecto a la integración de la APS, señalando la diversidad con respecto a los contextos nacionales, los tipos de estudio, las poblaciones de clientes, las poblaciones de profesionales sanitarios y el enfoque, el alcance y las estrategias de la intervención. Sería importante que los investigadores y los responsables de la toma de decisiones comprendieran cómo la diversidad en el diseño, la aplicación y el contexto de la intervención de integración de la APS podría influir en la forma en que los trabajadores sanitarios conciben el impacto de la integración de la APS. La clasificación de los estudios en función de las distintas dimensiones (p. ej., enfoque de la integración, alcance, estrategia y tipo de trabajadores sanitarios y poblaciones de clientes) puede ayudar a los investigadores a orientarse en la forma en que varía la bibliografía y especificar posibles preguntas para futuras síntesis de evidencia cualitativa.

Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research. DESIGN: Scoping review. PARTICIPANTS: Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

Soccer clubs as avenues for gender transformative socialization of adolescent boys in Cape Town and Mthatha, South Africa: A qualitative study.

In this paper, we explore the gender socialization of adolescent boys in soccer clubs, and ask whether there are opportunities for integrating gender transformative elements into that socialization. This qualitative study involved 11 in-depth interviews and informal conversations with male soccer coaches from Gugulethu township and Mthatha town in the Western Cape and Eastern Cape provinces of South Africa, respectively. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. We found that the coaches felt that the adolescent boys in their soccer clubs faced serious social and emotional challenges, with the boys' poor socio-economic backgrounds and fragmented family structures being major contributors to these challenges. Most coaches also gave themselves the responsibility to try to address some of the challenges faced by their club members. To do this, they employed specific strategies, including creating an alliance with parents and professionals. In the process, the coaches engaged the boys on topics around respect, sexual and reproductive health, and avoiding alcohol, drugs, and involvement in criminal gangs. Some coaches also played a social fathering role to club members as a way of helping them to think differently about their lives, redirect risky practices, and reduce the chance for poor health outcomes. These findings highlight the role of soccer clubs and coaches as potential avenues for health- and equity-promoting gender socialization of adolescent boys.

Critical Reflections on Conducting Qualitative Health Research During COVID-19: The Lived Experiences of a Cohort of Postgraduate Students in a South African University.

COVID-19 ushered in public health guidelines restricting face-to-face contact and movement, and encouraging social distancing, all of which had implications for conducting field-based research during the pandemic. For qualitative researchers, this meant adapting conventional face-to-face methods and resorting to virtual variations of the same in adherence to stipulated COVID-19 health protocols. Virtual qualitative research introduced new concerns and logistical challenges. This paper presents critical reflections on experiences of conducting qualitative research during the pandemic, from the perspectives of a cohort of postgraduate fellows. A critical reflection framework was utilised to explore fellows experiences and meanings ascribed to their experiences. The research findings illustrate three overarching processes which, in turn, shaped ways of thinking, doing and being. First, explicating tacit assumptions about their anticipated research journeys and interrogating these. Second, shifts in power differentials demonstrated by role reversal between researchers and participants, and between fellows and supervisors as they re-negotiated their positionalities in virtual research spaces. Third, context specific sense-making, in which - narrative accounts support the notion of knowledge as a social construct. Our findings have important implications for qualitative research practice. Our study documents methodological nuances and social implications of conducting qualitative research during COVID-19 and in a-South African context. In addition, our study exemplifies the use of critical reflection in qualitative research practice in the specific context of postgraduate academic research. Further, our study illustrates how the use of technology shapes qualitative research protocol development, data collection and analysis phases.

Report from the Ready for the Next Round Thought-Leadership Roundtables on Building Resilience in Cancer Care and Control in Canada-Colorectal Cancer Canada; 2021.

(1) Background: The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated vulnerabilities in the Canadian health care system and exposed gaps and challenges across the cancer care continuum. Canada is experiencing significant disruptions to cancer-related services, and the impact these disruptions (delays/deferrals/cancellations) have on the health care system and patients are yet to be determined. Given the potential adverse ramifications, how can Canada's health care systems build resilience for future threats? (2) Methods: To answer this question, CCC facilitated a series of four thought-leadership roundtables, each representing the views of four different stakeholder groups: patients, physicians, health care system leaders, and researchers. (3) Results: Six themes of strength were identified to serve as a springboard for building resilience including, (1) advancing virtual care and digital health technologies to prevent future interruptions in cancer care delivery. (2) developing real-time data metrics, data sharing, and evidence-based decision-making. (3) enhancing public-private-non-profit partnerships to advance research and strengthen connections across the system. (4) advancing patient-centricity in cancer research to drive and encourage precision medicine approaches to care. (5) investing in training and hiring a robust supply of health care human resources. (6) implementing a national strategy and infrastructure to ensure inter-provincial collaborative data sharing (4). Conclusions: A resilient health care system that can respond to shocks and threats is not an emergency system; it is a robust everyday system that can respond to emergencies.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination. OBJECTIVES: - Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review. MAIN RESULTS: We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Intervention development of a brief messaging intervention for a randomised controlled trial to improve diabetes treatment adherence in sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Brief messaging interventions, including Short Message Service (SMS) text-messages, delivered via mobile device platforms, show promise to support and improve treatment adherence. To understand how these interventions work, and to facilitate transparency, we need clear descriptions of the intervention development process. METHOD: We describe and reflect on the process of designing and pretesting an evidence- and theory-informed brief messaging intervention, to improve diabetes treatment adherence in sub-Saharan Africa. We followed the stepwise approach recommended by the Medical Research Council, United Kingdom (MRC UK) Framework for Development and Evaluation of Complex Health Interventions and guidance for mobile health intervention development. RESULTS: We used a four-phase, iterative approach that first generated primary and secondary evidence on the lived experience of diabetes, diabetes treatment services and mobile-phone use. Second, we designed a type 2 diabetes-specific, brief text-message library, building on our previous hypertension text-message library, as well as drawing on the primary and secondary data from phase one, and on expert opinion. We then mapped the brief text-messages onto behaviour change (COM-B) theoretical constructs. Third, we refined and finalised the newly developed brief text-message library through stakeholder consultation and translated it into three local languages. Finally, we piloted the intervention by pre-testing the automated delivery of the brief text-messages in the trial sites in Malawi and South Africa. The final SMS text Adherence suppoRt for people with type 2 diabetes (StAR2D) intervention was tested in a randomised controlled trial in Malawi and South Africa (trial registration: ISRCTN70768808 ). CONCLUSION: The complexity of public health interventions requires that we give more attention to intervention development work. Our documentation and reflection on the StAR2D intervention development process promotes transparency, replicability, assessment of intervention quality, and comparison with other studies.

Global evidence of gender inequity in academic health research: a living scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to describe the global evidence of gender inequity among individuals with appointments at academic institutions that conduct health research, and examine how gender intersects with other social identities to influence outcomes. INTRODUCTION: The gender demographics of universities have shifted, yet the characteristics of those who lead academic health research institutions have not reflected this change. Synthesized evidence will guide decision-making and policy development to support the progress of gender and other under-represented social identities in academia. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider any quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods primary research that reports outcome data related to gender equity and other social identities among individuals affiliated with academic or research institutions that conduct health research, originating from any country. METHODS: The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Cochrane Collaboration's guidance on living reviews will inform the review methods. Information sources will include electronic databases, unpublished literature sources, reference scanning of relevant systematic reviews, and sources provided by experts on the research team. Searches will be run regularly to monitor the development of new literature and determine when the review will be updated. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers working independently, and all discrepancies will be resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Data synthesis will summarize information using descriptive frequencies and simple thematic analysis. Results will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension to scoping reviews. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

Definitions, components and processes of data harmonisation in healthcare: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Data harmonisation (DH) has emerged amongst health managers, information technology specialists and researchers as an important intervention for routine health information systems (RHISs). It is important to understand what DH is, how it is defined and conceptualised, and how it can lead to better health management decision-making. This scoping review identifies a range of definitions for DH, its characteristics (in terms of key components and processes), and common explanations of the relationship between DH and health management decision-making. METHODS: This scoping review identified relevant studies from 2000 onwards (date filter), written in English and published in PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL. Two reviewers independently screened records for potential inclusion for the abstract and full-text screening stages. One reviewer did the data extraction, analysis and synthesis, with built-in reliability checks from the rest of the team. We developed a narrative synthesis of definitions and explanations of the relationship between DH and health management decision-making. RESULTS: We sampled 61 of 181 included to synthesis definitions and concepts of DH in detail. We identified six common terms for data harmonisation: record linkage, data linkage, data warehousing, data sharing, data interoperability and health information exchange. We also identified nine key components of data harmonisation: DH involves (a) a process of multiple steps; (b) integrating, harmonising and bringing together different databases (c) two or more databases; (d) electronic data; (e) pooling data using unique patient identifiers; and (f) different types of data; (g) data found within and across different departments and institutions at facility, district, regional and national levels; (h) different types of technical activities; (i) has a specific scope. The relationship between DH and health management decision-making is not well-described in the literature. Several studies mentioned health providers' concerns about data completeness, data quality, terminology and coding of data elements as barriers to data utilisation for clinical decision-making. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this scoping review was the first to synthesise definitions and concepts of DH and address the causal relationship between DH and health management decision-making. Future research is required to assess the effectiveness of data harmonisation on health management decision-making.

Routine Health Information System (RHIS) improvements for strengthened health system management.

BACKGROUND: A well-functioning routine health information system (RHIS) can provide the information needed for health system management, for governance, accountability, planning, policy making, surveillance and quality improvement, but poor information support has been identified as a major obstacle for improving health system management. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to improve routine health information systems in terms of RHIS performance, and also, in terms of improved health system management performance, and improved patient and population health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid and Embase Ovid in May 2019. We searched Global Health, Ovid and PsycInfo in April 2016. In January 2020 we searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and in OpenGrey, and for ongoing trials using the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. In October 2019 we also did a cited reference search using Web of Science, and a 'similar articles' search in PubMed. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and time-series studies comparing routine health information system interventions, with controls, in primary, hospital or community health care settings. Participants included clinical staff and management, district management and community health workers using routine information systems. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed records to identify studies for inclusion, extracted data from the included studies and assessed the risk of bias. Interventions and outcomes were too varied across studies to allow for pooled risk analysis. We present a 'Summary of findings' table for each intervention comparisons broadly categorised into Technical and Organisational (or a combination), and report outcomes on data quality and service quality. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included six studies: four cluster randomised trials and two controlled before-after studies, from Africa and South America. Three studies evaluated technical interventions, one study evaluated an organisational intervention, and two studies evaluated a combination of technical and organisational interventions. Four studies reported on data quality and six studies reported on service quality. In terms of data quality, a web-based electronic TB laboratory information system probably reduces the length of time to reporting of TB test results, and probably reduces the overall rate of recording errors of TB test results, compared to a paper-based system (moderate certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of the electronic laboratory information system on the recording rate of serious (misidentification) errors for TB test results compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). Misidentification errors are inaccuracies in transferring test results between an electronic register and patients' clinical charts. We are also uncertain about the effect of the intervention on service quality (timeliness of starting or changing a patient's TB treatment) (very low certainty evidence). A hand-held electronic device probably improves the length of time to report TB test results, and probably reduces the total frequency of recording errors in TB test results between the laboratory notebook and the electronic information record system, compared to a paper-based system (moderate-certainty evidence). We are, however, uncertain about the effect of the intervention on the frequency of serious (misidentification) errors in recording between the laboratory notebook and the electronic information record, compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of a hospital electronic health information system on service quality (length of time outpatients spend at hospital, length of hospital stay, and hospital revenue collection), compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). High-intensity brief text messaging (SMS) may make little or no difference to data quality (in terms of completeness of documentation of pregnancy outcomes), compared to low-intensity brief text messaging (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of electronic drug stock notification (with either data management support or product transfer support) on service quality (in terms of transporting stock and stock levels), compared to paper-based stock notification (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of health information strengthening (where it is part of comprehensive service quality improvement intervention) on service quality (health worker motivation, receipt of training by health workers, health information index scores, quality of clinical observation of children and adults) (very low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review indicates mixed effects of mainly technical interventions to improve data quality, with gaps in evidence on interventions aimed at enhancing data-informed health system management. There is a gap in interventions studying information support beyond clinical management, such as for human resources, finances, drug supply and governance. We need to have a better understanding of the causal mechanisms by which information support may affect change in management decision-making, to inform robust intervention design and evaluation methods.

Health Worker Experiences of and Perspectives on Engaging Men in HIV Care: A Qualitative Study in Cape Town, South Africa.

Men generally fare worse than women across the HIV cascade. While we know much about how men perceive the health services, we know little about how health workers (HWs) themselves have experienced engaging with men and what strategies they have used to improve this engagement. We interviewed 12 HWs in public health care services in Cape Town to better understand their experiences and perspectives. Health workers felt there were significant gaps in men's engagement with HIV care and identified masculine gender norms, the persistent impact of HIV stigma, and the competing priorities of employment as key barriers. They also highlighted a number of health service-related challenges, including a poor perception of the patient-provider relationship, frustration at low service quality, and unrealistic expectations of the health services. Health workers also described several strategies for more effectively engaging men and for making the health services both more male friendly and more people friendly.

Health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth), refers to healthcare practices supported by mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablets. Within primary care, health workers often use mobile devices to register clients, track their health, and make decisions about care, as well as to communicate with clients and other health workers. An understanding of how health workers relate to, and experience mHealth, can help in its implementation. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise qualitative research evidence on health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services, and to develop hypotheses about why some technologies are more effective than others. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index in January 2018. We searched Global Health in December 2015. We screened the reference lists of included studies and key references and searched seven sources for grey literature (16 February to 5 March 2018). We re-ran the search strategies in February 2020. We screened these records and any studies that we identified as potentially relevant are awaiting classification. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that used qualitative data collection and analysis methods. We included studies of mHealth programmes that were part of primary healthcare services. These services could be implemented in public or private primary healthcare facilities, community and workplace, or the homes of clients. We included all categories of health workers, as well as those persons who supported the delivery and management of the mHealth programmes. We excluded participants identified as technical staff who developed and maintained the mHealth technology, without otherwise being involved in the programme delivery. We included studies conducted in any country. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed abstracts, titles and full-text papers according to the inclusion criteria. We found 53 studies that met the inclusion criteria and sampled 43 of these for our analysis. For the 43 sampled studies, we extracted information, such as country, health worker category, and the mHealth technology. We used a thematic analysis process. We used GRADE-CERQual to assess our confidence in the findings. MAIN RESULTS: Most of the 43 included sample studies were from low- or middle-income countries. In many of the studies, the mobile devices had decision support software loaded onto them, which showed the steps the health workers had to follow when they provided health care. Other uses included in-person and/or text message communication, and recording clients' health information. Almost half of the studies looked at health workers' use of mobile devices for mother, child, and newborn health. We have moderate or high confidence in the following findings. mHealth changed how health workers worked with each other: health workers appreciated being more connected to colleagues, and thought that this improved co-ordination and quality of care. However, some described problems when senior colleagues did not respond or responded in anger. Some preferred face-to-face connection with colleagues. Some believed that mHealth improved their reporting, while others compared it to "big brother watching". mHealth changed how health workers delivered care: health workers appreciated how mHealth let them take on new tasks, work flexibly, and reach clients in difficult-to-reach areas. They appreciated mHealth when it improved feedback, speed and workflow, but not when it was slow or time consuming. Some health workers found decision support software useful; others thought it threatened their clinical skills. Most health workers saw mHealth as better than paper, but some preferred paper. Some health workers saw mHealth as creating more work. mHealth led to new forms of engagement and relationships with clients and communities: health workers felt that communicating with clients by mobile phone improved care and their relationships with clients, but felt that some clients needed face-to-face contact. Health workers were aware of the importance of protecting confidential client information when using mobile devices. Some health workers did not mind being contacted by clients outside working hours, while others wanted boundaries. Health workers described how some community members trusted health workers that used mHealth while others were sceptical. Health workers pointed to problems when clients needed to own their own phones. Health workers' use and perceptions of mHealth could be influenced by factors tied to costs, the health worker, the technology, the health system and society, poor network access, and poor access to electricity: some health workers did not mind covering extra costs. Others complained that phone credit was not delivered on time. Health workers who were accustomed to using mobile phones were sometimes more positive towards mHealth. Others with less experience, were sometimes embarrassed about making mistakes in front of clients or worried about job security. Health workers wanted training, technical support, user-friendly devices, and systems that were integrated into existing electronic health systems. The main challenges health workers experienced were poor network connections, access to electricity, and the cost of recharging phones. Other problems included damaged phones. Factors outside the health system also influenced how health workers experienced mHealth, including language, gender, and poverty issues. Health workers felt that their commitment to clients helped them cope with these challenges. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our findings propose a nuanced view about mHealth programmes. The complexities of healthcare delivery and human interactions defy simplistic conclusions on how health workers will perceive and experience their use of mHealth. Perceptions reflect the interplay between the technology, contexts, and human attributes. Detailed descriptions of the programme, implementation processes and contexts, alongside effectiveness studies, will help to unravel this interplay to formulate hypotheses regarding the effectiveness of mHealth.

Quantifying the HIV treatment cascade in a South African health sub-district by gender: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the HIV care cascade in a Cape Town sub-district to understand rates of linkage to and engagement in HIV care. METHODS: We used routinely collected data to reconstruct the treatment cascade for 8382 infected individuals who tested HIV + in 2012/2013. We obtained data on patient gender, year of initial HIV-positive test, age at testing and initial CD4 cell count and defined five stages of the HIV care cascade. We quantified attrition across cascade stages. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the sample (5646) were women. Men were older at time of first testing (36.5 vs. 31.3 years) and had more advanced HIV disease at diagnosis (298 vs. 404 CD4 cells/µL for women). The median duration of follow-up was 818 days. Among women, 90.5% attended an initial HIV care visit, 54.6% became eligible for antiretroviral therapy under local guidelines during follow-up, 49.3% initiated ART and 45.6% achieved a therapeutic response. Among men, 88.0% attended an initial HIV care visit, 67.4% became ART eligible during follow-up, 48.0% initiated ART and 42.4% achieved a therapeutic response. Approximately 3% of women and 5% of men died during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to reconstruct the HIV treatment cascade using routinely collected data. In this setting, rates of engagement in care differ by gender in key stages of the cascade, with men faring worse than women at each cascade point. This highlights the need for interventions aimed at encouraging earlier testing, linkage, ART initiation and retention among men.

OBJECTIFS: Quantifier la cascade des soins du VIH dans un sous-district de Cape Town pour comprendre les taux de liaisons et d'engagement avec les soins du VIH. MÉTHODES: Nous avons utilisé des données collectées en routine pour reconstruire la cascade de traitement pour 8.382 personnes infectées, testées positives pour le VIH en 2012/13. Nous avons obtenu des données sur le sexe du patient, l'année du premier test positif pour le VIH, l'âge au moment de ce test et le nombre initial de cellules CD4, et avons défini cinq étapes de la cascade des soins du VIH. Nous avons quantifié l'attrition au long des étapes de la cascade. RÉSULTATS: Deux tiers de l'échantillon (5.646) étaient des femmes. Les hommes étaient plus âgés au moment du premier test (36,5 contre 31,3 ans) et avaient la maladie du VIH plus avancée au moment du diagnostic (298 contre 404 cellules CD4/µL pour les femmes). La durée médiane de suivi était de 818 jours. Parmi les femmes, 90,5% ont pris part à une première visite pour des soins du VIH, 54,6% sont devenues éligibles au traitement antirétroviral selon les directives locales au cours du suivi, 49,3% ont commencé une ART et 45,6% ont atteint une réponse thérapeutique. Chez les hommes, 88,0% ont pris part à une première visite pour les soins du VIH; 67,4% sont devenus éligibles à l'ART au cours du suivi, 48,0% ont commencé l'ART et 42,4% ont atteint une réponse thérapeutique. Environ 3% des femmes et 5% des hommes sont décédés au cours du suivi. CONCLUSIONS: Nous avons pu reconstruire la cascade de traitement du VIH en utilisant des données collectées en routine. Dans ce contexte, les taux d'engagement dans les soins diffèrent selon le sexe dans les étapes clés de la cascade, les hommes s'en tirant moins bien que les femmes à chaque point de la cascade. Cela met en évidence la nécessité d'interventions visant à encourager le dépistage précoce, la liaison, l'initiation de l'ART et la rétention chez les hommes.

Clients' perceptions and experiences of targeted digital communication accessible via mobile devices for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Governments and health systems are increasingly using mobile devices to communicate with patients and the public. Targeted digital client communication is when the health system transmits information to particular individuals or groups of people, based on their health or demographic status. Common types of targeted client communication are text messages that remind people to go to appointments or take their medicines. Other types include phone calls, interactive voice response, or multimedia messages that offer healthcare information, advice, monitoring, and support. OBJECTIVES: To explore clients' perceptions and experiences of targeted digital communication via mobile devices on topics related to reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, or adolescent health (RMNCAH). SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (OvidSP), Embase (Ovid), World Health Organization Global Health Library, and POPLINE databases for eligible studies from inception to 3-6 July 2017 dependant on the database (See appendix 2). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; that explored clinets' perceptions and experiences of targeted digital communication via mobile device in the areas of RMNCAH; and were from any setting globally. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used maximum variation purposive sampling for data synthesis, employing a three-step sampling frame. We conducted a framework thematic analysis using the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence (SURE) framework as our starting point. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach. We used a matrix approach to explore whether potential implementation barriers identified in our synthesis had been addressed in the trials included in the related Cochrane Reviews of effectiveness. MAIN RESULTS: We included 35 studies, from a wide range of countries on six continents. Nineteen studies were conducted in low- and middle-income settings and sixteen in high-income settings. Some of the studies explored the views of people who had experienced the interventions, whereas others were hypothetical in nature, asking what people felt they would like from a digital health intervention. The studies covered a range of digital targeted client communication, for example medication or appointment reminders, prenatal health information, support for smoking cessation while pregnant, or general sexual health information.Our synthesis showed that clients' experiences of these types of programmes were mixed. Some felt that these programmes provided them with feelings of support and connectedness, as they felt that someone was taking the time to send them messages (moderate confidence in the evidence). They also described sharing the messages with their friends and family (moderate confidence).However, clients also pointed to problems when using these programmes. Some clients had poor access to cell networks and to the internet (high confidence). Others had no phone, had lost or broken their phone, could not afford airtime, or had changed their phone number (moderate confidence). Some clients, particularly women and teenagers, had their access to phones controlled by others (moderate confidence). The cost of messages could also be a problem, and many thought that messages should be free of charge (high confidence). Language issues as well as skills in reading, writing, and using mobile phones could also be a problem (moderate confidence).Clients dealing with stigmatised or personal health conditions such as HIV, family planning, or abortion care were also concerned about privacy and confidentiality (high confidence). Some clients suggested strategies to deal with these issues, such as using neutral language and tailoring the content, timing, and frequency of messages (high confidence).Clients wanted messages at a time and frequency that was convenient for them (moderate confidence). They had preferences for different delivery channels (e.g. short message service (SMS) or interactive voice response) (moderate confidence). They also had preferences about message content, including new knowledge, reminders, solutions, and suggestions about health issues (moderate confidence). Clients' views about who sent the digital health communication could influence their views of the programme (moderate confidence).For an overview of the findings and our confidence in the evidence, please see the 'Summary of qualitative findings' tables.Our matrix shows that many of the trials assessing these types of programmes did not try to address the problems we identified, although this may have been a reporting issue. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our synthesis identified several factors that can influence the successful implementation of targeted client communication programmes using mobile devices. These include barriers to use that have equity implications. Programme planners should take these factors into account when designing and implementing programmes. Future trial authors also need to actively address these factors and to report their efforts in their trial publications.

Mobile Messaging Support Versus Usual Care for People With Type 2 Diabetes on Glycemic Control: Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Health outcomes for people treated for type 2 diabetes could be substantially improved in sub-Saharan Africa. Failure to take medicine regularly to treat diabetes has been identified as a major problem. Resources to identify and support patients who are not making the best use of medicine in low- and middle-income settings are scarce. Mobile phones are widely available in these settings, including among people with diabetes; linked technologies, such as short message service (SMS) text messaging, have shown promise in delivering low-cost interventions efficiently. However, evidence showing that these interventions will work when carried out at a larger scale and measuring the extent to which they will improve health outcomes when added to usual care is limited. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this trial is to test the effectiveness of sending brief, automated SMS text messages for improving health outcomes and medication adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to an active control. METHODS: We will carry out a randomized trial recruiting from clinics in two contrasting settings in sub-Saharan Africa: Cape Town, South Africa, and Lilongwe, Malawi. Intervention messages will advise people about the benefits of their diabetes treatment and offer motivation and encouragement around lifestyle and use of medication. We allocated patients, using randomization with a minimization algorithm, to receive either three to four intervention messages per week or non-health-related messages every 6 weeks. We will follow up with participants for 12 months, measuring important risk factors for poor health outcomes and complications in diabetes. This will enable us to estimate potential health benefits, including the primary outcome of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels as a marker for long-term blood glucose control and a secondary outcome of blood pressure control. We will record the costs of performing these activities and estimate cost-effectiveness. We will also use process evaluation to capture the collection of medication and assess the reception of the intervention by participants and health care workers. RESULTS: Recruitment to the trial began in September 2016 and follow-up of participants was completed in October 2018. Data collection from electronic health records and other routinely collected sources is continuing. The database lock is anticipated in June 2019, followed by analysis and disclosing of group allocation. CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge gained from this study will have wide applications and advance the evidence base for effectiveness of mobile phone-based, brief text messaging on clinical outcomes and in large-scale, operational settings. It will provide evidence for cost-effectiveness and acceptability that will further inform policy development and decision making. We will work with a wide network that includes patients, clinicians, academics, industry, and policy makers to help us identify opportunities for informing people about the work and raise awareness of what is being developed and studied. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN70768808; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN70768808 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/786316Zqk). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12377.

Defining and conceptualising data harmonisation: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Data harmonisation is an important intervention to strengthen health systems functioning. It has the potential to enhance the production, accessibility and utilisation of routine health information for clinical and service management decision-making. It is important to understand the range of definitions and concepts of data harmonisation, as well as how its various social and technical components and processes are thought to lead to better health management decision-making. However, there is lack of agreement in the literature, and in practice, on definitions and conceptualisations of data harmonisation, making it difficult for health system decision-makers and researchers to design, implement, evaluate and compare data harmonisation interventions. This scoping review aims to synthesise (1) definitions and conceptualisations of data harmonisation as well as (2) explanations in the literature of the causal relationships between data harmonisation and health management decision-making. METHODS: This review follows recommended methodological stages for scoping studies. We will identify relevant studies (peer-reviewed and grey literature) from 2000 onwards, in English only, and with no methodological restriction, in various electronic databases, such as CINAHL, MEDLINE via PubMed and Global Health. Two reviewers will independently screen records for potential inclusion for the abstract and full-text screening stages. One reviewer will do the data extraction, analysis and synthesis, with built-in reliability checks from the rest of the team. We will use a combination of sampling techniques, including two types of 'purposeful sampling', a methodological approach that is particularly suitable for a scoping review with our objectives. We will provide (a) a numerical synthesis of characteristics of the included studies and (b) a narrative synthesis of definitions and explanations in the literature of the relationship between data harmonisation and health management decision-making. DISCUSSION: We list potential limitations of this scoping review. To our knowledge, this scoping review will be the first to synthesise definitions and conceptualisations of data harmonisation in the literature as well as the underlying explanations in the literature of the causal links between data harmonisation and health management decision-making.

"My wife's mistrust. That's the saddest part of being a diabetic": A qualitative study of sexual well-being in men with Type 2 diabetes in sub-Saharan Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual dysfunction is a common complication for men with diabetes, yet little is known about the lived experiences of sexual difficulties within the context of diabetes, particularly in low-and-middle-income countries. This study explores how men with type 2 diabetes in three sub-Saharan African settings (Cape Town and Johannesburg, South Africa; Lilongwe, Malawi) perceive and experience sexual functioning and sexual well-being, and the biopsychosocial contexts in which these occur and are shaped. METHODS: We used a qualitative research design, including individual interviews (n = 15) and focus group discussions (n = 4). Forty-seven men were included in the study. We used an inductive thematic analysis approach to develop our findings. A biopsychosocial conceptual model on the relationship between chronic illness and sexuality informed the interpretation of findings. RESULTS: Men across the study settings identified sexual difficulties as a central concern of living with diabetes. These difficulties went beyond biomedical issues of erectile dysfunction, comprising complex psychological and relational effects. Low self-esteem, related to a sense of loss of masculinity and reduced sexual and emotional intimacy in partner relationships were common experiences. Specific negative relational effects included suspicion of infidelity, mutual mistrust, general unhappiness, and fear of losing support from partners. These effects may impact on men's ability to cope with their diabetes. Further stressors were a lack of information about the reasons for their sexual difficulties, perceived lack of support from healthcare providers and an inability to communicate with partners about sexual difficulties. CONCLUSION: More in-depth research is needed to better understand sexual functioning and well-being within the context of diabetes, and its potential impact on diabetes self-management. Holistic and patient-centered care should include raising awareness of sexual problems as a potential complication of diabetes amongst patients, their partners and care providers, and incorporating sexual well-being as part of routine clinical care.