Dataset Information

The challenge of sustaining effectiveness over time: the case of the global network to stop tuberculosis.

ABSTRACT: Where once global health decisions were largely the domain of national governments and the World Health Organization, today networks of international organizations, governments, private philanthropies and other entities are actively shaping public policy. However, there is still limited understanding of how global networks form, how they create institutions, how they promote and sustain collective action, and how they adapt to changes in the policy environment. Understanding these processes is crucial to understanding their effectiveness: whether and how global networks influence policy and public health outcomes. This study seeks to address these gaps through the examination of the global network to stop tuberculosis (TB) and the factors influencing its effectiveness over time. Drawing from ? 200 document sources and 16 interviews with key informants, we trace the development of the Global Partnership to Stop TB and its work over the past decade. We find that having a centralized core group and a strategic brand helped the network to coalesce around a primary intervention strategy, directly observed treatment short course. This strategy was created before the network was formalized, and helped bring in donors, ministries of health and other organizations committed to fighting TB-growing the network. Adaptations to this strategy, the creation of a consensus-based Global Plan, and the creation of a variety of participatory venues for discussion, helped to expand and sustain the network. Presently, however, tensions have become more apparent within the network as it struggles with changing internal political dynamics and the evolution of the disease. While centralization and stability helped to launch and grow the network, the institutionalization of governance and strategy may have constrained adaptation. Institutionalization and centralization may, therefore, facilitate short-term success for networks, but may end up complicating longer-term effectiveness.

SUBMITTER: Quissell K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4954557 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The challenge of sustaining effectiveness over time: the case of the global network to stop tuberculosis.

Quissell Kathryn K Walt Gill G

Health policy and planning 20150817

Where once global health decisions were largely the domain of national governments and the World Health Organization, today networks of international organizations, governments, private philanthropies and other entities are actively shaping public policy. However, there is still limited understanding of how global networks form, how they create institutions, how they promote and sustain collective action, and how they adapt to changes in the policy environment. Understanding these processes is c ...[more]

PMID: 26282859

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundComparative effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines across patient subgroups is poorly understood and essential to precisely targeting vaccination strategies.MethodsWe used the US Department of Veterans Affairs COVID-19 Shared Data Resource to identify veterans who utilize VA health care and had no documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection before December 11, 2020. Using a test-negative case-control design (TND), we used conditional logistic regression with adjustment for covariates to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) over time for veterans who received 2 doses of mRNA vaccines or 1 dose of Ad26.Cov2.S.ResultsWe identified 4.8 million veterans with a mean age of 64 years, of whom 58% had ≥1 chronic disease. Vaccine effectiveness for symptomatic infections, hospitalizations, and ICU admission or death declined over time and varied by the type of vaccine (P < 0.01). VE estimates against symptomatic infection during months 1 and 7 for mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2 were 89.7% (95% CI, 84.4%-93.0%) and 57.3% (95% CI, 48.4%-64.7%) vs 81.6% (95% CI, 75.9%-85.9%) and 22.5% (95% CI, 7.2%-35.2%) for individuals age <65 years and 78.4% (95% CI, 71.1%-83.9%) and 36.2% (95% CI, 27.7%-43.6%) vs 66.3% (95% CI, 55.7%-74.4%) and -23.3% (95% CI, -40.5% to -8.2%) in subjects age ≥65 years; against hospitalization 92.0% (95% CI, 76.1%-97.3%) and 83.1% (95% CI, 66.8%-91.4%) vs 85.6% (95% CI, 72.6%-92.4%) and 57.0% (95% CI, 31.2%-73.2%) in subjects age <65 years and 66.1% (95% CI, 45.3%-79.0%) and 64.7% (95% CI, 55.2%-72.3%) vs 61.0% (95% CI, 41.3%-74.2%) and 1.7% (95% CI, -22.0% to 20.8%) in those age ≥65 years; against ICU admission or death 89.2% (95% CI, 49.5%-97.7%) and 84.4% (95% CI, 59.0%-94.1%) vs 87.6% (95% CI, 61.0%-96.1%) and 66.4% (95% CI, 7.7%-87.8%) in subjects age <65 years and 75.4% (95% CI, 51.7%-87.5%) and 73.8 (95% CI, 62.9%-81.5%) vs 67.4% (95% CI, 32.6%-84.3%) and 29.3% (95% CI, 2.3%-48.9%) in subjects age ≥65 years, respectively (P interaction < .01 for all comparisons). Similarly, mRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 in veterans with >1 chronic disease.ConclusionsmRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 in older veterans and those with chronic diseases.

Project description:BackgroundResearch suggests the protection offered by COVID-19 vaccines might wane over time, prompting consideration of booster vaccinations. Data on which vaccines offer the most robust protection over time, and which patients are most vulnerable to attenuating protection, could help inform potential booster programmes. In this study, we used comprehensive hospitalisation data to estimate vaccine effectiveness over time.MethodsIn this case-control study, we used data from a large US health-care system to estimate vaccine effectiveness against severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and examined variation based on time since vaccination, vaccine type, and patients' demographic and clinical characteristics. We compared trends in attenuation of protection across vaccines and used a multivariable model to identify key factors associated with risk for severe breakthrough infection. Patients were considered to have severe COVID-19 if they were admitted to the hospital, had a final coded diagnosis of COVID-19 (according to International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision code U07.1) or a positive nucleic acid amplification test for symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 during their hospitalisation, and were treated with remdesivir or dexamethasone during hospitalisation.FindingsBetween April 1, 2021, and Oct 26, 2021, we observed 9667 admissions for severe COVID-19 (ie, cases). Overall, 1293 (13·4%) of 9667 cases were fully vaccinated at the time of admission, compared with 22 308 (57·7%) of 38 668 controls, who were admitted to hospital for other reasons. The median time between vaccination and hospital admission among cases was 162 days (IQR 118-198). Overall vaccine effectiveness declined mostly over the course of the summer, from 94·5% (95% CI 91·4-96·5) in April, 2021 (pre-delta), to 84·0% (81·6-86·1) by October, 2021. Notably, vaccine effectiveness declined over time, from 94·0% (95% CI 92·8-95·0) at days 50-100 after vaccination to 80·4% (77·8-82·7) by days 200-250 after vaccination. After 250 days, vaccine effectiveness declines were even more notable. Among those who received the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, vaccine effectiveness fell from an initial peak of 94·9% (93·2-96·2) to 74·1% (69·6-77·9) by days 200-250 after vaccination. Protection from the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and Ad26.COV2 (Janssen) vaccines declined less over time, although the latter offered lower overall protection. Holding other factors constant, the risk of severe breakthrough infection was most strongly associated with age older than 80 years (adjusted odds ratio 1·76, 95% CI 1·43-2·15), vaccine type (Pfizer 1·39, 0·98-1·97; Janssen 14·53, 8·43-25·03; both relative to Moderna), time since vaccination (1·05, 1·03-1·07; per week after week 8 when protection peaks, technically), and comorbidities including organ transplantation (3·44, 95% CI 2·12-5·57), cancer (1·93, 1·60-2·33), and immunodeficiency (1·49, 1·13-1·96).InterpretationVaccination remains highly effective against hospitalisation, but vaccine effectiveness declined after 200 days, particularly for older patients or those with specific comorbidities. Additional protection (eg, a booster vaccination) might be warranted for everyone, but especially for these populations. In addition to promoting general vaccine uptake, clinicians and policy makers should consider prioritising booster vaccinations in those most at risk of severe COVID-19.FundingNone.

Project description:Psychotic depression (PD) is a severe disabling disorder with considerable morbidity and mortality. Electroconvulsive therapy and pharmacotherapy are each efficacious in the treatment of PD. Expert guidelines recommend the combination of antidepressant and antipsychotic medications in the acute pharmacologic treatment of PD. However, little is known about the continuation treatment of PD. Of particular concern, it is not known whether antipsychotic medication needs to be continued once an episode of PD responds to pharmacotherapy. This issue has profound clinical importance. On the one hand, the unnecessary continuation of antipsychotic medication exposes a patient to adverse effects, such as weight gain and metabolic disturbance. On the other hand, premature discontinuation of antipsychotic medication has the potential risk of early relapse of a severe disorder.The primary goal of this multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial is to assess the risks and benefits of continuing antipsychotic medication in persons with PD once the episode of depression has responded to treatment with an antidepressant and an antipsychotic. Secondary goals are to examine age and genetic polymorphisms as predictors or moderators of treatment variability, potentially leading to more personalized treatment of PD. Individuals aged 18-85 years with unipolar psychotic depression receive up to 12 weeks of open-label treatment with sertraline and olanzapine. Participants who achieve remission of psychosis and remission/near-remission of depressive symptoms continue with 8 weeks of open-label treatment to ensure stability of remission. Participants with stability of remission are then randomized to 36 weeks of double-blind treatment with either sertraline and olanzapine or sertraline and placebo. Relapse is the primary outcome. Metabolic changes are a secondary outcome.This trial will provide clinicians with much-needed evidence to guide the continuation and maintenance treatment of one of the most disabling and lethal of psychiatric disorders.

Dataset Information

The challenge of sustaining effectiveness over time: the case of the global network to stop tuberculosis.

Publications

The challenge of sustaining effectiveness over time: the case of the global network to stop tuberculosis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets