Advancing health through evidence assisted decisions with health policy and systems research program: a qualitative evaluation of a national health research grant management process in the Philippines.

BACKGROUND: Health policy and systems research (HPSR) has influenced Philippine policies, including tobacco control, mental health, and COVID-19. The Department of Health (DOH) Philippines and Philippine Council for Health Research and Development (PCHRD) launched the Advancing Health through Evidence-Assisted Decisions (AHEAD) with HPSR program in 2017, aiming to build a community of researchers and decision-makers committed to evidence production and utilization. Research systems employ grant management processes for transparency and accountability in research funding, preventing waste, fraud, and misuse of funds. METHODS: This study evaluated AHEAD-HPSR's grant management using surveys, interviews, and focus groups to document (1) grant administration processes implemented by DOH and PCHRD, and (2) experiences of grantees, program managers, staff, and policymakers. Data were initially analyzed through the USA Grant Accountability Office's Federal Grant Life Cycle, with new themes created as they emerged. The study identified processes and gaps in the research grant life cycle stages: design/redesign, pre-award, award, implementation, closeout, and research dissemination and utilization. RESULTS: Identification of research areas for the grant are identified using national and departmental research priorities. While Calls for Proposals are posted publicly, researchers that have previously worked with policymakers are contacted directly to submit proposals. The evaluation found that research is delayed by bureaucracies in grant administration, particularly in financial reporting and ethics review processes. Complying with the terminal financial report was identified as the most challenging part of the grant process due to immense auditing requirements. Grantees recommend the simplification of bureaucracy for fund release to enable them to focus on research work. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to the limited literature on health research grant management in developing countries. Valuable information and recommendations were contributed by stakeholders in this evaluation. These are manifestations of a continuing interest and desire to make health policy and systems research in the Philippines more robust and relevant. It is imperative for the program to continually evolve and build systems most applicable to its multidisciplinary context.

Research priority-setting for human, plant, and animal virology: an online experience for the Virology Institute of the Philippines.

BACKGROUND: Viral pandemics have had catastrophic consequences on population health and economies. The Philippine government intends to establish the Virology Institute of the Philippines, one of the key areas of which will be virology research. This project aimed to develop the institute's research agenda across the fields of human, plant, and animal virology. METHODOLOGY: Key considerations for the prioritization methodology were (1) the imminent establishment of the Virology Institute of the Philippines, (2) mobility restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, (3) the timeline to develop the research agenda, and (4) the need to separate the research agenda for the three fields of human, plant, and animal virology. The process was fully conducted online in four steps: stakeholder identification, soliciting research priorities, generating initial research priorities, and final prioritization consultations conducted on Zoom Pro. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants attended three online consultations between 21 and 27 July 2020 through Zoom Pro. Participants selected the research prioritization criteria and its weights, and used these to evaluate the research priorities. The final research agenda covers topics in epidemiology, diagnostics, surveillance, biosafety, and genomics. CONCLUSION: This initiative resulted in the first research agenda for the Virology Institute of the Philippines across the three fields of human, plant, and animal virology. An expert-driven process which places a premium on consensus-building facilitated through online platforms was the most feasible approach to develop the research agenda. This process resulted in an agenda aligned with the mandates of national research councils but leaves gaps on areas such as emerging infectious diseases. Pre-COVID-19 literature expressed apprehensions on the online medium that weakens social ties necessary for consensus. Our experience with changing the mode of consensus-building shows that users will continually adapt to technology. Online tools are currently able to address the limitations of the virtual space.

Assessment of the Biosafety and Biosecurity Landscape in the Philippines and the Development of the National Biorisk Management Framework.

Introduction: The emergence of biological threats that can potentially affect millions emphasizes the need to develop a policy framework in the Philippines that can mount an adequate and well-coordinated response. The objective of the study was to assess, strengthen, and harmonize efforts in biorisk management through the development of a National Biorisk Management Framework. Methods: The development of the National Biorisk Management Framework was carried out in two phases: (1) assessment of the current biosafety and biosecurity landscape and (2) framework development. Results: This study identified policy gaps in the incorporation of biosafety in course curricula, professional development, and organizational twinning. The desired policy outcomes focus on increasing the capacity and quality of facilities, and the development of the biosafety officer profession. The tabletop exercises revealed weak implementation of existing protocols and unclear coordination mechanisms for emergency response. Based on these, a framework was drafted composed of eight key areas in biosafety and biosecurity, and four key contexts in risk reduction and management. Discussion and Conclusion: Reforms in biosafety and biosecurity policies are expected to improve coordination, ensure sustainability, capacitate facilities, and professionalize biosafety officers. Because of the complexity of reforms necessary, success will require a consistent and coherent policy framework that (1) provides well-coordinated mechanisms toward harmonized risk reduction and management, (2) establishes and enforces guidelines on biosafety, biosecurity, and biorisk management, (3) regulates facilities essential for occupational safety and public health, and (4) is financed by the General Appropriations Act as part of the national budget.

Packed red cells versus whole blood transfusion for severe paediatric anaemia, pregnancy-related anaemia and obstetric bleeding: an analysis of clinical practice guidelines from sub-Saharan Africa and evidence underpinning recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: Blood component transfusion is increasingly promoted in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), but is resource-intensive so whole blood is often used. We examined SSA recommendations about whole blood and packed red cell transfusions for pregnancy-related bleeding or anaemia, and paediatric anaemia, and evaluated the evidence underpinning these recommendations. METHOD: Relevant SSA guidelines were identified using five electronic databases, websites for SSA Ministries of Health, blood transfusion services and WHO. To facilitate comparisons, indications for transfusing packed red cells or whole blood within these guidelines and reasons given for these recommendations were recorded on a pre-designed matrix. The AGREE II tool was used to appraise guidelines that gave a reason for recommending either packed red cells or whole blood. We systematically searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane library and NHSBT Transfusion Evidence Library, using PRISMA guidelines, for clinical studies comparing whole blood with packed red cells or combined blood components in obstetric bleeding or anaemia, or paediatric anaemia. Characteristics and findings of included studies were extracted in a standardised format and narratively summarised. RESULTS: 32 English language guidelines from 15 SSA countries mentioned packed red cell or whole blood use for our conditions of interest. Only seven guidelines justified their recommendation for using packed red cells or whole blood. No recommendations or justifications had supporting citations to research evidence. 33 full-text papers, from 11 234 citations, were reviewed but only one study met our inclusion criteria. This was a single-centre study in post-partum haemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Evidence comparing whole blood and packed red cell transfusion for common paediatric and maternal indications is virtually absent in SSA. Therefore, it is unclear whether policies promoting red cells over whole blood transfusion are clinically appropriate. Building a relevant evidence base will help develop effective policies promoting the most appropriate use of blood in African settings.