Can knowledgeable experts assess costs and outcomes as if they were ignorant? An experiment within precision medicine evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the validity of the standard approach in expert judgment for evaluating precision medicines, in which experts are required to estimate outcomes as if they did not have access to diagnostic information, whereas in fact, they do. METHODS: Fourteen clinicians participated in an expert judgment task to estimate the cost and medical outcomes of the use of exome sequencing in pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy in Thailand. Experts were randomly assigned to either an "unblind" or "blind" group; the former was provided with the exome sequencing results for each patient case prior to the judgment task, whereas the latter was not provided with the exome sequencing results. Both groups were asked to estimate the outcomes for the counterfactual scenario, in which patients had not been tested by exome sequencing. RESULTS: Our study did not show significant results, possibly due to the small sample size of both participants and case studies. CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of the unblind and blind approach did not show conclusive evidence that there is a difference in outcomes. However, until further evidence suggests otherwise, we recommend the blind approach as preferable when using expert judgment to evaluate precision medicines because this approach is more representative of the counterfactual scenario than the unblind approach.

Equity assessment of maternal and child healthcare benefits utilization and distribution in public healthcare facilities in Bangladesh: a benefit incidence analysis.

BACKGROUND: The distribution of healthcare services should be based on the needs of the population, regardless of their ability to pay. Achieving universal health coverage implies first ensuring that people of all income levels have access to quality healthcare, and then allocating resources reasonably considering individual need. Hence, this study aims to understand how public benefits in Bangladesh are currently distributed among wealth quintiles considering different layers of healthcare facilities and to assess the distributional impact of public benefits. METHODS: To conduct this study, data were extracted from the recent Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017-18. We performed benefit incidence analysis to determine the distribution of maternal and child healthcare utilization in relation to wealth quintiles. Disaggregated and national-level public benefit incidence analysis was conducted by the types of healthcare services, levels of healthcare facilities, and overall utilization. Concentration curves and concentration indices were estimated to measure the equity in benefits distribution. RESULTS: An unequal utilization of public benefits observed among the wealth quintiles for maternal and child healthcare services across the different levels of healthcare facilities in Bangladesh. Overall, upper two quintiles (richest 19.8% and richer 21.7%) utilized more benefits from public facilities compared to the lower two quintiles (poorest 18.9% and poorer 20.1%). Benefits utilization from secondary level of health facilities was highly pro-rich, while benefit utilization found pro-poor at primary levels. The public benefits in Bangladesh were also not distributed according to the needs of the population; nevertheless, poorest 20% household cannot access 20% share of public benefits in most of the maternal and child healthcare services even if we ignore their needs. CONCLUSIONS: Benefit incidence analysis in public health spending demonstrates the efficacy with which the government allocates constrained health resources to satisfy the needs of the poor. Public health spending in Bangladesh on maternal and child healthcare services were not equally distributed among wealth quintiles. Overall health benefits were more utilized by the rich relative to the poor. Hence, policymakers should prioritize redistribution of resources by targeting the socioeconomically vulnerable segments of the population to increase their access to health services to meet their health needs.

Inequalities and mental health during the Coronavirus pandemic in the UK: a mixed-methods exploration.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation declared the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a global pandemic on 11th March 2020. Since then, the world has been firmly in its grip. At the time of writing, there were more than 767,972,961 million confirmed cases and over 6,950,655 million deaths. While the main policy focus has been on controlling the virus and ensuring vaccine roll-out and uptake, the population mental health impacts of the pandemic are expected to be long-term, with certain population groups affected more than others. METHODS: The overall objectives of our 'Coronavirus: Mental Health and the Pandemic' study were to explore UK adults' experiences of the Coronavirus pandemic and to gain insights into the mental health impacts, population-level changes over time, current and future mental health needs, and how these can best be addressed. The wider mixed-methods study consisted of repeated cross-sectional surveys and embedded qualitative sub-studies including in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with the wider UK adult population. For this particular inequalities and mental health sub-study, we used mixed methods data from our cross-sectional surveys and we carried out three Focus Group Discussions with a maximum variation sample from across the UK adult population. The discussions covered the broader topic of 'Inequalities and mental health during the Coronavirus pandemic in the UK' and took place online between April and August 2020. Focus Groups transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis in NVIVO. Cross-sectional survey data were analysed using STATA for descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Three broad main themes emerged, each supporting a number of sub-themes: (1) Impacts of the pandemic; (2) Moving forward: needs and recommendations; (3) Coping mechanisms and resilience. Findings showed that participants described their experiences of the pandemic in relation to its impact on themselves and on different groups of people. Their experiences illustrated how the pandemic and subsequent measures had exacerbated existing inequalities and created new ones, and triggered various emotional responses. Participants also described their coping strategies and what worked and did not work for them, as well as support needs and recommendations for moving forward through, and out of, the pandemic; all of which are valuable learnings to be considered in policy making for improving mental health and for ensuring future preparedness. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic is taking a long-term toll on the nations' mental health which will continue to have impacts for years to come. It is therefore crucial to learn the vital lessons learned from this pandemic. Specific as well as whole-government policies need to respond to this, address inequalities and the different needs across the life-course and across society, and take a holistic approach to mental health improvement across the UK.

Developing a combined framework for priority setting in integrated health and social care systems.

BACKGROUND: There is an international move towards greater integration of health and social care to cope with the increasing demand on services.. In Scotland, legislation was passed in 2014 to integrate adult health and social care services resulting in the formation of 31 Health and Social Care Partnerships (HSCPs). Greater integration does not eliminate resource scarcity and the requirement to make (resource) allocation decisions to meet the needs of local populations. There are different perspectives on how to facilitate and improve priority setting in health and social care organisations with limited resources, but structured processes at the local level are still not widely implemented. This paper reports on work with new HSCPs in Scotland to develop a combined multi-disciplinary priority setting and resource allocation framework. METHODS: To develop the combined framework, a scoping review of the literature was conducted to determine the key principles and approaches to priority setting from economics, decision-analysis, ethics and law, and attempts to combine such approaches. Co-production of the combined framework involved a multi-disciplinary workshop including local, and national-level stakeholders and academics to discuss and gather their views. RESULTS: The key findings from the literature review and the stakeholder workshop were taken to produce a final combined framework for priority setting and resource allocation. This is underpinned by principles from economics (opportunity cost), decision science (good decisions), ethics (justice) and law (fair procedures). It outlines key stages in the priority setting process, including: framing the question, looking at current use of resources, defining options and criteria, evaluating options and criteria, and reviewing each stage. Each of these has further sub-stages and includes a focus on how the combined framework interacts with the consultation and involvement of patients, public and the wider staff. CONCLUSIONS: The integration agenda for health and social care is an opportunity to develop and implement a combined framework for setting priorities and allocating resources fairly to meet the needs of the population. A key aim of both integration and the combined framework is to facilitate the shifting of resources from acute services to the community.

A novel and practical care process framework to inform model of care development.

Breaking free of pre-existing assumptions to achieve transformative change in care delivery remains challenging. This article presents a care process framework using a rapid task analysis tested with healthcare teams across five communities in British Columbia, Canada, to provide leaders a novel and practical approach to care model development. The study's goals were to determine if the framework was replicable even though the population care needs differed for each community. The results showed the framework was replicable, informed the care model development, and identified ideal scopes of practice and team composition given the context of care. The framework also captured expert tacit knowledge and decision-making to build capacity given our current workforce challenges. For operational leaders and government agencies, the use of the framework may influence a shift in historical approaches that better aligns health and human resources capacity to population health and service needs.

Economic Analysis of Border Control Policies during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Modelling Study to Inform Cross-Border Travel Policy between Singapore and Thailand.

With countries progressing towards high COVID-19 vaccination rates, strategies for border reopening are required. This study focuses on Thailand and Singapore, two countries that share significant tourism visitation, to illustrate a framework for optimizing COVID-19 testing and quarantine policies for bilateral travel with a focus on economic recovery. The timeframe is the month of October 2021, when Thailand and Singapore were preparing to reopen borders for bilateral travel. This study was conducted to provide evidence for the border reopening policy decisions. Incremental net benefit (INB) compared to the pre-opening period was quantified through a willingness-to-travel model, a micro-simulation COVID-19 transmission model and an economic model accounting for medical and non-medical costs/benefits. Multiple testing and quarantine policies were examined, and Pareto optimal (PO) policies and the most influential components were identified. The highest possible INB for Thailand is US $125.94 million, under a PO policy with no quarantine but with antigen rapid tests (ARTs) pre-departure and upon arrival to enter both countries. The highest possible INB for Singapore is US $29.78 million, under another PO policy with no quarantine on both sides, no testing to enter Thailand, and ARTs pre-departure and upon arrival to enter Singapore. Tourism receipts and costs/profits of testing and quarantine have greater economic impacts than that from COVID-19 transmission. Provided healthcare systems have sufficient capacity, great economic benefits can be gained for both countries by relaxing border control measures.

Examining holistically the experiences of mentors in school-based programs: A logic analysis.

The article presents a Logic Analysis of the Scottish MCR ("Motivation, Commitment and Resilience") Pathways school-based mentoring scheme. MCR Pathways provides vulnerable secondary school students with one-to-one support, helping them realize their full potential through education. The perceptions of 12 mentors were explored through interviews, thematically analyzed and mapped to derive the program's Theory of Change as regards the volunteers themselves. This model was then assessed against the evidence base yielded from prior studies. The evaluation highlighted a mismatch between mentors' outcome expectations and what they actually gained from the experience. Furthermore, some themes (e.g., being driven by community concerns) turned out to be more prominent in the context of this specific scheme than in the wider literature, as opposed to other ones (e.g., developing friendships). The study generates insights into the ways to attract and retain growing numbers of volunteers, as well as to advance scientific knowledge.

Why cost-effectiveness thresholds for global health donors should differ from thresholds for Ministries of Health (and why it matters).

Healthcare cost-effectiveness analysis is increasingly used to inform priority-setting in low- and middle-income countries and by global health donors. As part of such analyses, cost-effectiveness thresholds are commonly used to determine what is, or is not, cost-effective. Recent years have seen a shift in best practice from a rule-of-thumb 1x or 3x per capita GDP threshold towards using thresholds that, in theory, reflect the opportunity cost of new investments within a given country. In this paper, we observe that international donors face both different resource constraints and opportunity costs compared to national decision-makers. Hence, their perspective on cost-effectiveness thresholds must be different. We discuss the potential implications of distinguishing between national and donor thresholds and outline broad options for how to approach setting a donor-perspective threshold. Further work is needed to clarify healthcare cost-effectiveness threshold theory in the context of international aid and to develop practical policy frameworks for implementation.

The mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK during the Coronavirus pandemic: A qualitative exploration.

Background: Worldwide, the Coronavirus pandemic has had a major impact on people's health, lives, and livelihoods. However, this impact has not been felt equally across various population groups. People from ethnic minority backgrounds in the UK have been more adversely affected by the pandemic, especially in terms of their physical health. Their mental health, on the other hand, has received less attention. This study aimed to explore the mental health experiences of UK adults from ethnic minorities during the Coronavirus pandemic. This work forms part of our wider long-term UK population study "Mental Health in the Pandemic." Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with people from ethnic minority communities across the UK. A series of in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 women, 14 men and 1 non-binary person from ethnic minority backgrounds, aged between 18 and 65 years old (mean age = 40). We utilized purposefully selected maximum variation sampling in order to capture as wide a variety of views, perceptions and experiences as possible. Inclusion criteria: adults (18+) from ethnic minorities across the UK; able to provide full consent to participate; able to participate in a video- or phone-call interview. All interviews took place via MS Teams or Zoom. The gathered data were transcribed verbatim and underwent thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke carried out using NVivo 12 software. Results: The qualitative data analysis yielded seven overarching themes: (1) pandemic-specific mental health and wellbeing experiences; (2) issues relating to the media; (3) coping mechanisms; (4) worries around and attitudes toward vaccination; (5) suggestions for support in moving forward; (6) best and worst experiences during pandemic and lockdowns; (7) biggest areas of change in personal life. Generally, participants' mental health experiences varied with some not being affected by the pandemic in a way related to their ethnicity, some sharing positive experiences and coping strategies (exercising more, spending more time with family, community cohesion), and some expressing negative experiences (eating or drinking more, feeling more isolated, or even racism and abuse, especially toward Asian communities). Concerns were raised around trust issues in relation to the media, the inadequate representation of ethnic minorities, and the spread of fake news especially on social media. Attitudes toward vaccinations varied too, with some people more willing to have the vaccine than others. Conclusion: This study's findings highlight the diversity in the pandemic mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK and has implications for policy, practice and further research. To enable moving forward beyond the pandemic, our study surfaced the need for culturally appropriate mental health support, financial support (as a key mental health determinant), accurate media representation, and clear communication messaging from the Governments of the UK.

Implementation barriers and remedial strategies for community-based health insurance in Bangladesh: insights from national stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Community-based health insurance (CBHI) is a part of the health system in Bangladesh, and overcoming the obstacles of CBHI is a significant policy concern that has received little attention. The purpose of this study is to analyze the implementation barriers of voluntary CBHI schemes in Bangladesh and the strategies to overcome these barriers from the perspective of national stakeholders. METHODS: This study is exploratory qualitative research, specifically case study design, using key informant interviews to investigate the barriers of CBHI that are faced during the implementation. Using a topic guide, we conducted thirteen semi-structured in-depth interviews with key stakeholders directly involved in the CBHI implementation process. The data were analyzed using the Framework analysis method. RESULTS: The implementation of CBHI schemes in Bangladesh is being constrained by several issues, including inadequate population coverage, adverse selection and moral hazard, lack of knowledge about health insurance principles, a lack of external assistance, and insufficient medical supplies. Door-to-door visits by local community-health workers, as well as regular promotional and educational campaigns involving community influencers, were suggested by stakeholders as ways to educate and encourage people to join the schemes. Stakeholders emphasized the necessity of external assistance and the design of a comprehensive benefits package to attract more people. They also recommended adopting a public-private partnership with a belief that collaboration among the government, microfinance institutions, and cooperative societies will enhance trust and population coverage in Bangladesh. CONCLUSIONS: Our research concludes that systematically addressing implementation barriers by including key stakeholders would be a significant reform to the CBHI model, and could serve as a foundation for the planned national health protection scheme for Bangladesh leading to universal health coverage.

Drivers and distribution of the household-level double burden of malnutrition in Bangladesh: analysis of mother-child dyads from a national household survey.

OBJECTIVE: The double burden of malnutrition (DBM) has become an emerging public health issue in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aims to provide important evidence for the prevalence of different types of DBM at the national and subnational levels in Bangladesh. DESIGN: The study utilised data from the latest Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) 2017-2018. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify the sociodemographic factors associated with DBM. SETTING: Nationally representative cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: 8697 mothers aged 15 to 49 years with <5 children. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of the DBM was approximately 21 %, where the prevalence of overweight mother (OWM) & stunted child/wasted child/underweight child (SC/WC/UWC) and underweight mother (UWM) & overweight child (OWC) was 13·35 % and 7·69 %, respectively, with a higher prevalence among urban households (OWM & SC/WC/UWC = 14·22 %; UWM & OWC = 10·58 %) in Bangladesh. High inequality was observed among UWM & OWC dyads, concentration index (CI) = -0·2998, while low level of inequality of DBM were observed for OWM & SC (CI = 0·0153), OWM & WC (CI = 0·1165) and OWM & UWC (CI = 0·0135) dyads. We observed that the age and educational status of the mother, number of children, fathers' occupation, size and wealth index of the household, and administrative division were significantly associated with all types of DBM. CONCLUSIONS: Health policymakers, concerned authorities and various stakeholders should stress the prevalence of DBM issues and take necessary actions aimed at identifying and addressing the DBM in Bangladesh.

Disease-specific distress healthcare financing and catastrophic out-of-pocket expenditure for hospitalization in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Financial risk protection and equity are two fundamental components of the global commitment to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC), which mandates health system reform based on population needs, disease incidence, and economic burden to ensure that everyone has access to health services without any financial hardship. We estimated disease-specific incidences of catastrophic out-of-pocket health expenditure and distress financing to investigate progress toward UHC financial risk indicators and investigated inequalities in financial risk protection indicators by wealth quintiles. In addition, we explored the determinants of financial hardship indicators as a result of hospitalization costs. METHODS: In order to conduct this research, data were extracted from the latest Bangladesh Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES), conducted by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics in 2016-2017. Financial hardship indicators in UHC were measured by catastrophic health expenditure and distress financing (sale/mortgage, borrowing, and family support). Concentration curves (CC) and indices (CI) were estimated to measure the pattern and severity of inequalities across socio-economic classes. Binary logistic regression models were used to assess the determinants of catastrophic health expenditure and distress financing. RESULTS: We found that about 26% of households incurred catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and 58% faced distress financing on hospitalization in Bangladesh. The highest incidence of CHE was for cancer (50%), followed by liver diseases (49.2%), and paralysis (43.6%). The financial hardship indicators in terms of CHE (CI = -0.109) and distress financing (CI = -0.087) were more concentrated among low-income households. Hospital admission to private health facilities, non-communicable diseases, and the presence of chronic patients in households significantly increases the likelihood of higher UHC financial hardship indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings strongly suggest the need for national-level social health security schemes with a particular focus on low-income households, since we identified greater inequalities between low- and high-income households in UHC financial hardship indicators. Regulating the private sector and implementing subsidized healthcare programmes for diseases with high treatment costs, such as cancer, heart disease, liver disease, and kidney disease are also expected to be effective to protect households from financial hardship. Finally, in order to reduce reliance on OOPE, the government should consider increasing its allocations to the health sector.

A model-based study to estimate the health and economic impact of health technology assessment in Thailand.

OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessment (HTA) plays a central role in the coverage and reimbursement decision-making process for public health expenditure in many countries, including Thailand. However, there have been few attempts to quantitatively understand the benefits of using HTA to inform resource allocation decisions. The objective of this research was to simulate the expected net monetary benefit (NMB) from using HTA-based decision criteria compared to a first-come, first-served (FCFS) approach using data from Thailand. METHODS: A previously published simulation model was adapted to the Thai context which aimed to simulate the impact of using different decision-making criteria to adopt or reject health technologies for public reimbursement. Specifically, the simulation model provides a quantitative comparison between an HTA-based funding rule and a counterfactual (FCFS) funding rule to make decisions on which health technologies should be funded. The primary output of the model was the NMB of using HTA-based decision criteria compared to the counterfactual approach. The HTA-based decision rule in the model involved measuring incremental cost-effectiveness ratios against a cost-effectiveness threshold. The counterfactual decision rule was a FCFS (random) selection of health technologies. RESULTS: The HTA-based decision rule was associated with a greater NMB compared to the counterfactual. In the investigated analyses, the NMB ranged from THB24,238 million (USD725 million) to THB759,328 million (USD22,719 million). HTA-based decisions led to fewer costs, superior health outcomes (more quality-adjusted life-years). CONCLUSIONS: The results support the hypothesis that HTA can provide health and economic benefits by improving the efficiency of resource allocation decision making.

What is the value of explicit priority setting for health interventions? A simulation study.

Many countries seek to secure efficiency in health spending through establishing explicit priority setting institutions (PSIs). Since such institutions divert resources from frontline services which benefit patients directly, it is legitimate and reasonable to ask whether they are worth the money. We address this question by comparing, through simulation, the health benefits and costs from implementing two alternative funding approaches - one scenario in which an active PSI enables cost-effectiveness-threshold based funding decisions, and a counterfactual scenario where there is no PSI. We present indicative results for one dataset from the United Kingdom (published in 2015) and one from Malawi (published in 2018), which show that the threshold rule reliably resulted in decreased health system costs, improved health benefits, or both. Our model is implemented in Microsoft Excel and designed to be user-friendly, and both the model and a user guide are made publicly available, in order to enable others to parameterise the model based on the local setting. Although inevitably stylised, we believe that our modelling and results offer a valid perspective on the added value of explicit PSIs.

Optimal subscription models to pay for antibiotics.

Novel subscription payment schemes are one of the approaches being explored to tackle the threat of antimicrobial resistance. Under these schemes, some or all of the payment is made via a fixed "subscription" payment, which provides a funder unlimited access to the treatment for a specific duration, rather than relying purely on a price per pill. Subscription-based schemes guarantee pharmaceutical firms income that incentivises investment in developing new antibiotics, and can promote responsible stewardship. From the pharmaceutical perspective, revenue is disassociated from sales, removing benefits from push marketing strategies. We investigate this from the funder perspective, and consider that the funder plays a key role in promoting responsible antibiotic stewardship by choosing the price per pill for providers such that this encourages appropriate antibiotic use. This choice determines the payment structure, and we investigate the impact of this choice through the lens of social welfare. We present a mathematical model of subscription payment schemes, explicitly featuring fixed and volume-based payment components for a given treatment price. Total welfare returned at a societal level is then estimated (incorporating financial costs and monetised benefits). We consider a practical application of the model to development of novel antibiotic treatment for Gonorrhoea, and examine the optimal treatment price under different parameterisations. Specifically, we analyse two contrasting scenarios - one where a new antibiotic's prioritised role is reducing transmission, and one where a more pressing requirement is conserving the antibiotic as an effective last defence. Critically, this analysis demonstrates that effective roll-out of a subscription payment scheme for a new antibiotic requires a comprehensive assessment of the benefits gained from treatment. We discuss the insights this work presents on the nature of these payment schemes, and how these insights can enable decision-makers to take the first steps in determining effective structuring of subscription payment schemes.

Income trajectories and self-rated health status in the UK.

In line with the wide recognition of the connection between socioeconomic status and health outcomes, attention in the recent literature is extending the static perspective to the dynamic implications of income on health. This study contributes to the growing literature on the income-health nexus by evaluating income dynamics on various self-rated health measures in the UK. We explore the impact of different indicators of income experiences on self-rated health and wellbeing outcomes using data from the 11 Waves of Understanding Society UK Household Longitudinal Study between 2009 and 2019. First, we estimate a fixed-effects ordered logit model for various health and wellbeing measures, allowing us to control for unobserved time-invariant heterogeneity. Second, we evaluate the effects of income trajectories by linking longitudinal household income to cross-sectional health outcomes. Our results confirm the general evidence of positive impacts of increasing family income on health. Besides, we find that stability in income position is strongly associated with improved health and wellbeing. On the other hand, income volatility increases the odds of reporting poor health outcomes, particularly for those in low-income households. Also, more years spent in a lower-income quartile reduces the odds of reporting improved self-rated health. Finally, the significant difference in the estimated effects of income before and after 2016 highlights the significant shifts in the effects of income trajectories on self-reported health and wellbeing following the National Living Wage policy implementation.

Reference Case Methods for Expert Elicitation in Health Care Decision Making.

BACKGROUND: The evidence used to inform health care decision making (HCDM) is typically uncertain. In these situations, the experience of experts is essential to help decision makers reach a decision. Structured expert elicitation (referred to as elicitation) is a quantitative process to capture experts' beliefs. There is heterogeneity in the existing elicitation methodology used in HCDM, and it is not clear if existing guidelines are appropriate for use in this context. In this article, we seek to establish reference case methods for elicitation to inform HCDM. METHODS: We collated the methods available for elicitation using reviews and critique. In addition, we conducted controlled experiments to test the accuracy of alternative methods. We determined the suitability of the methods choices for use in HCDM according to a predefined set of principles for elicitation in HCDM, which we have also generated. We determined reference case methods for elicitation in HCDM for health technology assessment (HTA). RESULTS: In almost all methods choices available for elicitation, we found a lack of empirical evidence supporting recommendations. Despite this, it is possible to define reference case methods for HTA. The reference methods include a focus on gathering experts with substantive knowledge of the quantities being elicited as opposed to those trained in probability and statistics, eliciting quantities that the expert might observe directly, and individual elicitation of beliefs, rather than solely consensus methods. It is likely that there are additional considerations for decision makers in health care outside of HTA. CONCLUSIONS: The reference case developed here allows the use of different methods, depending on the decision-making setting. Further applied examples of elicitation methods would be useful. Experimental evidence comparing methods should be generated.

Antimicrobial Resistance: Is Health Technology Assessment Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

Antimicrobial resistance is a serious challenge to the success and sustainability of our healthcare systems. There has been increasing policy attention given to antimicrobial resistance in the last few years, and increased amounts of funding have been channeled into funding for research and development of antimicrobial agents. Nevertheless, manufacturers doubt whether there will be a market for new antimicrobial technologies sufficient to enable them to recoup their investment. Health technology assessment (HTA) has a critical role in creating confidence that if valuable technologies can be developed they will be reimbursed at a level that captures their true value. We identify 3 deficiencies of current HTA processes for appraising antimicrobial agents: a methods-centric approach rather than problem-centric approach for dealing with new challenges, a lack of tools for thinking about changing patterns of infection, and the absence of an approach to epidemiological risks. We argue that, to play their role more effectively, HTA agencies need to broaden their methodological tool kit, design and communicate their analysis to a wider set of users, and incorporate long-term policy goals, such as containing resistance, as part of their evaluation criteria alongside immediate health gains.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Lower-Middle Income Countries: National Stakeholder Views on Challenges, Barriers, and Potential Solutions.

The development of COVID-19 vaccines does not imply the end of the global pandemic as now countries have to purchase enough COVID-19 vaccine doses and work towards their successful rollout. Vaccination across the world has progressed slowly in all, but a few high-income countries (HICs) as governments learn how to vaccinate their entire populations amidst a pandemic. Most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been relying on the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Facility to obtain vaccines. COVAX aims to provide these countries with enough doses to vaccinate 20% of their populations. LMICs will likely encounter additional barriers and challenges rolling out vaccines compared HICs despite their significant experience from the Expanded Programme on Immunisation (EPI). This study explores potential barriers that will arise during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in lower-middle-income countries and how to overcome them. We conducted sixteen semi-structured interviews with national-level stakeholders from Ghana and Bangladesh (eight in each country). Stakeholders included policymakers and immunisation programme experts. Data were analysed using a Framework Analysis technique. Stakeholders believed their country could use existing EPI structures for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout despite existing challenges with the EPI and despite its focus on childhood immunisation rather than vaccinating the entire population over a short period of time. Stakeholders suggested increasing confidence in the vaccine through community influencers and by utilising local government accredited institutions such as the Drug Authorities for vaccine approval. Additional strategies they discussed included training more health providers and recruiting volunteers to increase vaccination speed, expanding government budgets for COVID-19 vaccine purchase and delivery, and exploring other financing opportunities to address in-country vaccine shortages. Stakeholders also believed that LMICs may encounter challenges complying with priority lists. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination is different from previous vaccination programs, and therefore, policymakers have to expand the EPI structure and also take a systematic and collaborative approach to plan and effectively rollout the vaccines.