Dataset Information

Supporting recommendations for childhood preventive interventions for primary health care: elaboration of evidence synthesis and lessons learnt.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recommendations to prevent morbidity and mortality in children was a high priority for the editorial group of a WHO pocket book for primary health care in the European region. However, the benefit of preventive interventions is not always clear and recommendations differ across countries and institutions. Here, we summarize the existing recommendations and the most recent evidence on ten selected preventive interventions applied to children under five years to inform this group. In addition, we reflect on the process and challenges of developing these summaries.

Methods

For each intervention, we systematically searched for current recommendations from the WHO, the United States Preventive Services Task Force, the workgroup PrevInfad from the Spanish Association of Primary Care Pediatrics, the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Then, we systematically searched the sources above and the Cochrane library for relevant systematic reviews. For each topic, we reported the recommendations and the strength of the recommendation when and as reported by the authors. We summarized the main findings of systematic reviews with the certainty of the evidence as reported. Categorising the ten preventive interventions in three groups allowed narrative comparisons between similar types of interventions and between groups.

Results and discussion

For the single interventions of providing vitamins D and K and topical fluoride there is overall a high degree of consensus between institutions for the evidence of their effectiveness. For the multiple interventions to prevent sudden infant death syndrome and unintentional injuries consensus was more variable as evidence of effectiveness is harder to ascertain. For the screening interventions the summaries of recommendations and evidence varied too. While institutions generally agreed in recommending for vision screening and against universal screening for language and speech delay and iron deficiency, they had some differences for pulse oximetry and autism. The transparent and independent process shed light upon how institutions use existing evidence in their settings - common and different positions were accounted for and became visible. We also identified gaps and duplications of research. Our approach was a crucial starting point for developing the respective sections in the pocket book.

SUBMITTER: Jullien S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8424794 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCholera is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in low-resource and humanitarian settings. It is transmitted by fecal-oral route, and the infection risk is higher to those living in and near cholera cases. Rapid identification of cholera cases and implementation of measures to prevent subsequent transmission around cases may be an efficient strategy to reduce the size and scale of cholera outbreaks.Methodology/principle findingsWe investigated implementation of cholera case-area targeted interventions (CATIs) using systematic reviews and case studies. We identified 11 peer-reviewed and eight grey literature articles documenting CATIs and completed 30 key informant interviews in case studies in Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Yemen, and Zimbabwe. We documented 15 outbreaks in 12 countries where CATIs were used. The team composition and the interventions varied, with water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions implemented more commonly than those of health. Alert systems triggering interventions were diverse ranging from suspected cholera cases to culture confirmed cases. Selection of high-risk households around the case household was inconsistent and ranged from only one case to approximately 100 surrounding households with different methods of selecting them. Coordination among actors and integration between sectors were consistently reported as challenging. Delays in sharing case information impeded rapid implementation of this approach, while evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions varied.Conclusions/significanceCATIs appear effective in reducing cholera outbreaks, but there is limited and context specific evidence of their effectiveness in reducing the incidence of cholera cases and lack of guidance for their consistent implementation. We propose to 1) use uniform cholera case definitions considering a local capacity to trigger alert; 2) evaluate the effectiveness of individual or sets of interventions to interrupt cholera, and establish a set of evidence-based interventions; 3) establish criteria to select high-risk households; and 4) improve coordination and data sharing amongst actors and facilitate integration among sectors to strengthen CATI approaches in cholera outbreaks.

Project description:Infectious disease forecasting is gaining traction in the public health community; however, limited systematic comparisons of model performance exist. Here we present the results of a synthetic forecasting challenge inspired by the West African Ebola crisis in 2014-2015 and involving 16 international academic teams and US government agencies, and compare the predictive performance of 8 independent modeling approaches. Challenge participants were invited to predict 140 epidemiological targets across 5 different time points of 4 synthetic Ebola outbreaks, each involving different levels of interventions and "fog of war" in outbreak data made available for predictions. Prediction targets included 1-4 week-ahead case incidences, outbreak size, peak timing, and several natural history parameters. With respect to weekly case incidence targets, ensemble predictions based on a Bayesian average of the 8 participating models outperformed any individual model and did substantially better than a null auto-regressive model. There was no relationship between model complexity and prediction accuracy; however, the top performing models for short-term weekly incidence were reactive models with few parameters, fitted to a short and recent part of the outbreak. Individual model outputs and ensemble predictions improved with data accuracy and availability; by the second time point, just before the peak of the epidemic, estimates of final size were within 20% of the target. The 4th challenge scenario - mirroring an uncontrolled Ebola outbreak with substantial data reporting noise - was poorly predicted by all modeling teams. Overall, this synthetic forecasting challenge provided a deep understanding of model performance under controlled data and epidemiological conditions. We recommend such "peace time" forecasting challenges as key elements to improve coordination and inspire collaboration between modeling groups ahead of the next pandemic threat, and to assess model forecasting accuracy for a variety of known and hypothetical pathogens.