Missing in action: a scoping review of gender as the overlooked component in decolonial discourses.

INTRODUCTION: Race and gender were intimately intertwined aspects of the colonial project, used as key categories of hierarchisation within both colonial and modern societies. As such, true decolonisation is only possible when both are addressed equally; failure to address the colonial root causes of gender-based inequalities will allow for the perpetuation of racialised notions of gender to persist across the global health ecosystem. However, the authors note with concern the relative sidelining of gender within the decolonising global health discourse, especially as it navigates the critical transition from rhetoric to action. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to locate where gender does, or does not, appear within the decolonising global health literature. The authors reviewed the decolonising global health literature available on Scopus and PubMed online databases to identify peer-reviewed papers with the search terms "(decoloni* or de-coloni*) OR (neocolonial or neo-colonial) AND 'global health'" in their title, abstract or keywords published by December 2022. RESULTS: Out of 167 papers on decolonising global health, only 53 (32%) had any reference to gender and only 26 (16%) explicitly engaged with gender as it intersects with (de)coloniality. Four key themes emerged from these 26 papers: an examination of coloniality's racialised and gendered nature; how this shaped and continues to shape hierarchies of knowledge; how these intertwining forces drive gendered impacts on health programmes and policies; and how a decolonial gender analysis can inform action for change. CONCLUSION: Historical legacies of colonisation continue to shape contemporary global health practice. The authors call for the integration of a decolonial gender analysis in actions and initiatives that aim to decolonise global health, as well as within allied movements which seek to confront the root causes of power asymmetries and inequities.

Towards a Feminist Global Health Policy: Power, intersectionality, and transformation.

In the realm of global health policy, the intricacies of power dynamics and intersectionality have become increasingly evident. Structurally embedded power hierarchies constitute a significant concern in achieving health for all and demand transformational change. Adopting intersectional feminist approaches potentially mitigates health inequities through more inclusive and responsive health policies. While feminist approaches to foreign and development policies are receiving increasing attention, they are not accorded the importance they deserve in global health policy. This article presents a framework for a Feminist Global Health Policy (FGHP), outlines the objectives and underlying principles and identifies the actors responsible for its meaningful implementation. Recognising that power hierarchies and societal contexts inherently shape research, the proposed framework was developed via a participatory research approach that aligns with feminist principles. Three independent online focus groups were conducted between August and September 2022 with 11 participants affiliated to the global-academic or local-activist level and covering all WHO regions. The qualitative content analysis revealed that a FGHP must be centred on considerations of intersectionality, power and knowledge paradigms to present meaningful alternatives to the current structures. By balancing guiding principles with sensitivity for context-specific adaptations, the framework is designed to be applicable locally and globally, whilst its adoption is intended to advance health equity and reproductive justice, with communities and policymakers identified as the main actors. This study underscores the importance of dismantling power structures by fostering intersectional and participatory approaches for a more equitable global health landscape. The FGHP framework is intended to initiate debate among global health practitioners, policymakers, researchers and communities. Whilst an undeniably intricate and time-consuming process, continuous and collaborative work towards health equity is imperative to translate this vision into practice.

Developing an agenda for the decolonization of global health.

Colonialism, which involves the systemic domination of lands, markets, peoples, assets, cultures or political institutions to exploit, misappropriate and extract wealth and resources, affects health in many ways. In recent years, interest has grown in the decolonization of global health with a focus on correcting power imbalances between high-income and low-income countries and on challenging ideas and values of some wealthy countries that shape the practice of global health. We argue that decolonization of global health must also address the relationship between global health actors and contemporary forms of colonialism, in particular the current forms of corporate and financialized colonialism that operate through globalized systems of wealth extraction and profiteering. We present a three-part agenda for action that can be taken to decolonize global health. The first part relates to the power asymmetries that exist between global health actors from high-income and historically privileged countries and their counterparts in low-income and marginalized settings. The second part concerns the colonization of the structures and systems of global health governance itself. The third part addresses how colonialism occurs through the global health system. Addressing all forms of colonialism calls for a political and economic anticolonialism as well as social decolonization aimed at ensuring greater national, racial, cultural and knowledge diversity within the structures of global health.

Le colonialisme, qui implique la domination systémique de terres, de marchés, de peuples, de ressources, de cultures ou d'institutions politiques dans le but d'exploiter, de détourner et d'extraire des richesses et des ressources, affecte la santé de nombreuses manières. Ces dernières années, la décolonisation de la santé mondiale a suscité un intérêt croissant, l'accent étant mis sur la correction des déséquilibres de pouvoir entre les pays à revenu élevé et les pays à faible revenu, ainsi que sur la remise en question des idées et des valeurs de certains pays riches qui façonnent la pratique de la santé mondiale. Nous soutenons que la décolonisation de la santé mondiale doit également aborder la relation entre les acteurs de la santé mondiale et les formes contemporaines de colonialisme, en particulier les formes actuelles de colonialisme d'entreprise et de colonialisme financiarisé qui opèrent par des systèmes mondialisés d'extraction de richesses et de profits. Nous présentons un programme d'action en trois parties destiné à décoloniser la santé mondiale. La première partie porte sur les asymétries de pouvoir existant entre les acteurs de la santé mondiale des pays à hauts revenus et historiquement privilégiés et leurs homologues des pays à faibles revenus et marginalisés. La deuxième partie concerne la colonisation des structures et des systèmes de la gouvernance mondiale de la santé elle-même. La troisième partie traite de la manière dont le colonialisme se manifeste à travers le système de santé mondial. La lutte contre toutes les formes de colonialisme nécessite un anticolonialisme politique et économique ainsi qu'une décolonisation sociale visant à garantir une plus grande diversité nationale, raciale, culturelle et des connaissances au sein des structures de la santé mondiale.

El colonialismo, que implica la dominación sistémica de tierras, mercados, pueblos, bienes, culturas o instituciones políticas para explotar, apropiarse indebidamente y extraer riqueza y recursos, afecta a la salud de muchas maneras. En los últimos años ha crecido el interés por descolonizar la salud mundial, en particular para corregir los desequilibrios de poder entre los países de ingresos altos y los de ingresos bajos, y para cuestionar las ideas y los valores de algunos países ricos que influyen en la práctica de la salud mundial. Sostenemos que la descolonización de la salud mundial también debe abordar la relación entre los actores de la salud mundial y las formas contemporáneas de colonialismo, en especial las formas actuales de colonialismo corporativo y financiarizado que operan a través de sistemas globalizados de extracción de riqueza y especulación. Presentamos un programa de acción dividido en tres partes para descolonizar la salud mundial. La primera parte se refiere a las asimetrías de poder que existen entre los actores de la salud mundial procedentes de países de ingresos altos e históricamente privilegiados y sus homólogos de entornos de ingresos bajos y marginados. La segunda parte se refiere a la colonización de las estructuras y sistemas de la propia gobernanza de la salud mundial. La tercera parte aborda cómo se produce el colonialismo a través del sistema sanitario mundial. Abordar todas las formas de colonialismo exige un anticolonialismo político y económico, así como una descolonización social destinada a garantizar una mayor diversidad nacional, racial, cultural y de conocimientos dentro de las estructuras de la salud mundial.

Global Health Equity Requires Global Equity.

Many global health challenges are characterized by the inequitable patterning of their health and economic consequences, which are etched along the lines of pre-existing inequalities in resources, power, and opportunity. These links require us to reconsider how we define global health equity, and what we consider as most consequential in its pursuit. In this article, we discuss the extent to which improving underlying global equity is an essential prerequisite to global health equity. We conclude that if we are to improve global health equity, there is a need to focus more on foundational-rather than proximal-causes of ill health and propose ways in which this can be achieved.

Implementing "from here to there": A case study of conceptual and practical challenges in implementation science.

There is a significant challenge in global health and development research that pivots on the difficulties of delivering (cost-)effective treatments or interventions that are scalable andtransferable across settings. That is, how does one deliver "true effects", proven treatments, into new settings? This is often addressed in pragmatic trials or implementation research in which one makes adjustments to the delivery of the treatment to ensure that it works here and there. In this critical analytical review, we argue that the approach mis-characterises the cause-effect relationship and fails to recognise the local, highly contextual nature of what it means to say an intervention "works". We use an ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCT)-an informal settlement redevelopment intervention in Indonesia and Fiji to reduce human exposure to pathogenic faecal contamination-as a vehicle for exploring the ideas and implications of identifying interventions that work in global health and development. We describe the highly contextualised features of the research and the challenges these would pose in attempts to generalise the results. In other words, we detail that which is frequently elided from most RCTs. As our critical lens, we us the work of American philosopher, Nancy Cartwright, who argued that research produces dappled regions of causal insights-lacunae against a backdrop of causal ignorance. Rather than learn about a relationship between a treatment and an outcome, we learn that in the right sort of context, a treatment reliably produces a particular outcome. Moving a treatment from here to there becomes, therefore, something of an engineering exercise to ensure the right factors (or "shields") are in place so the cause-effect is manifest. As a consequence, one cannot assume that comparative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness would be maintained.

Designing the next generation of implementation research training for learners in low- and middle-income countries.

Efficacious health interventions tested through controlled trials often fail to show desired impacts when implemented at scale. These challenges can be particularly pervasive in low- and middle-income settings where health systems often lack the capacity and mechanisms required for high-quality research and evidence translation. Implementation research is a powerful tool for identifying and addressing the bottlenecks impeding the success of proven health interventions. Implementation research training initiatives, although growing in number, remain out of reach for many investigators in low- and middle-income settings, who possess the knowledge required to contextualize challenges and potential solutions in light of interacting community- and system-level features. We propose a realigned implementation research training model that centers on team-based learning, tailored didactic opportunities, learning-by-doing, and mentorship.

Researching social innovation: is the tail wagging the dog?

BACKGROUND: Social Innovation in health initiatives have the potential to address unmet community health needs. For sustainable change to occur, we need to understand how and why a given intervention is effective. Bringing together communities, innovators, researchers, and policy makers is a powerful way to address this knowledge gap but differing priorities and epistemological backgrounds can make collaboration challenging. MAIN TEXT: To overcome these barriers, stakeholders will need to design policies and work in ways that provide an enabling environment for innovative products and services. Inherently about people, the incorporation of community engagement approaches is necessary for both the development of social innovations and accompanying research methodologies. Whilst the 'appropriate' level of participation is linked to intended outcomes, researchers have a role to play in better understanding how to harness the power of community engagement and to ensure that community perspectives form part of the evidence base that informs policy and practice. CONCLUSIONS: To effectively operate at the intersection between policy, social innovation, and research, all collaborators need to enter the process with the mindset of learners, rather than experts. Methods - quantitative and qualitative - must be selected according to research questions. The fields of implementation research, community-based participatory research, and realist research, amongst others, have much to offer. So do other sectors, notably education and business. In all this, researchers must assume the mantel of responsibility for research and not transfer the onus to communities under the guise of participation. By leveraging the expertise and knowledge of different ecosystem actors, we can design responsive health systems that integrate innovative approaches in ways that are greater than the sum of their parts.

The Phylogeny of Rickettsia Using Different Evolutionary Signatures: How Tree-Like is Bacterial Evolution?

Rickettsia is a genus of intracellular bacteria whose hosts and transmission strategies are both impressively diverse, and this is reflected in a highly dynamic genome. Some previous studies have described the evolutionary history of Rickettsia as non-tree-like, due to incongruity between phylogenetic reconstructions using different portions of the genome. Here, we reconstruct the Rickettsia phylogeny using whole-genome data, including two new genomes from previously unsampled host groups. We find that a single topology, which is supported by multiple sources of phylogenetic signal, well describes the evolutionary history of the core genome. We do observe extensive incongruence between individual gene trees, but analyses of simulations over a single topology and interspersed partitions of sites show that this is more plausibly attributed to systematic error than to horizontal gene transfer. Some conflicting placements also result from phylogenetic analyses of accessory genome content (i.e., gene presence/absence), but we argue that these are also due to systematic error, stemming from convergent genome reduction, which cannot be accommodated by existing phylogenetic methods. Our results show that, even within a single genus, tests for gene exchange based on phylogenetic incongruence may be susceptible to false positives.

Complementarity of statistical treatments to reconstruct worldwide routes of invasion: the case of the Asian ladybird Harmonia axyridis.

Inferences about introduction histories of invasive species remain challenging because of the stochastic demographic processes involved. Approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) can help to overcome these problems, but such method requires a prior understanding of population structure over the study area, necessitating the use of alternative methods and an intense sampling design. In this study, we made inferences about the worldwide invasion history of the ladybird Harmonia axyridis by various population genetics statistical methods, using a large set of sampling sites distributed over most of the species' native and invaded areas. We evaluated the complementarity of the statistical methods and the consequences of using different sets of site samples for ABC inferences. We found that the H. axyridis invasion has involved two bridgehead invasive populations in North America, which have served as the source populations for at least six independent introductions into other continents. We also identified several situations of genetic admixture between differentiated sources. Our results highlight the importance of coupling ABC methods with more traditional statistical approaches. We found that the choice of site samples could affect the conclusions of ABC analyses comparing possible scenarios. Approaches involving independent ABC analyses on several sample sets constitute a sensible solution, complementary to standard quality controls based on the analysis of pseudo-observed data sets, to minimize erroneous conclusions. This study provides biologists without expertise in this area with detailed methodological and conceptual guidelines for making inferences about invasion routes when dealing with a large number of sampling sites and complex population genetic structures.