Project description:BACKGROUND:HTA Programme funding is governed by the need for evidence and scientific quality, reflecting funding of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) by the NHS. The need criterion incorporates covering the spectrum of diseases, but also taking account of research supported by other funders. This study compared the NIHR HTA Programme portfolio of research with the UK burden of disease as measured by Disability-adjusted Life Years (DALYs). METHODS:A retrospective cross-sectional study using a cohort of all funded primary research and evidence syntheses projects received by the HTA Programme from April 2011 to March 2016 (n = 363); to determine the proportion of spend by disease compared with burden of disease in the UK calculated using 2015 UK DALY data. RESULTS:The programme costing just under £44 million broadly reflected UK DALY burden by disease. Spend was lower than disease burden for cancer, cardiovascular and musculoskeletal diseases, which may reflect the importance of other funders, notably medical charities, which concentrate on these diseases. CONCLUSION:The HTA Programme spend, adjusted for other relevant funders, broadly matches disease burden in the UK; no diseases are being neglected.
Project description:Collaborative research partnerships are necessary to answer key questions in global mental health, to share expertise, access funding and influence policy. However, partnerships between low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and high-income countries have often been inequitable with the provision of technical knowledge flowing unilaterally from high to lower income countries. We present the experience of the Programme for Improving Mental Health Care (PRIME), a LMIC-led partnership which provides research evidence for the development, implementation and scaling up of integrated district mental healthcare plans in Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa and Uganda. We use Tuckman's first four stages of forming, storming, norming and performing to reflect on the history, formation and challenges of the PRIME Consortium. We show how this resulted in successful partnerships in relation to management, research, research uptake and capacity building and reflect on the key lessons for future partnerships.
Project description:BackgroundShort-term school eye health programmes supported by external funders have sustainability issues. This study aimed to understand the contextual factors affecting integrating eye health into the school health programme.MethodsWe elicited responses from 83 respondents, purposefully selected from the Ministry of Health (n = 7), Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (n = 7), hospitals/eye centres (n = 5), master trainers (4) and schools (n = 60) who participated in in-depth interviews. Their responses were analysed and grouped into contextual factors according to the WHO Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: stakeholders/political, institutional, physical, cultural, delivery system and others. Themes were then generated, and quotations were presented to illustrate the findings.ResultsThe six contextual factors affecting the integration of eye health into the school eye health programme were i) Stakeholders/political (Good ministry coordination, defined departmental roles and resource mobilisation from multiple stakeholders; Good stakeholder synergies and address current gaps); ii) Institutional (Institutional coordination and adequate clinic space; Securing human and financial resources; Strategic advocacy for institutional resources); iii) Physical (Long travel distance to service points); vi) Cultural (low eye health awareness among parents, teachers and children); iv) Delivery system (Practical approach to increase screening coverage using teachers as screeners; Balance teachers' workload, increase screening sensitivity and follow up and; v) Others (Comprehensive training material and effective training delivery; Improved curriculum, teacher selection and supervision and incentives).ConclusionIntegrated school eye health delivery is generally well-received by stakeholders in Zanzibar, with the caveat that investment is required to address the six contextual factors identified in the study.
Project description:BackgroundIn this paper, we argue for Gender as a Sociocultural Variable (GASV) as a complement to Sex as a Biological Variable (SABV). Sex (biology) and gender (sociocultural behaviors and attitudes) interact to influence health and disease processes across the lifespan-which is currently playing out in the COVID-19 pandemic. This study develops a gender assessment tool-the Stanford Gender-Related Variables for Health Research-for use in clinical and population research, including large-scale health surveys involving diverse Western populations. While analyzing sex as a biological variable is widely mandated, gender as a sociocultural variable is not, largely because the field lacks quantitative tools for analyzing the influence of gender on health outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive review of English-language measures of gender from 1975 to 2015 to identify variables across three domains: gender norms, gender-related traits, and gender relations. This yielded 11 variables tested with 44 items in three US cross-sectional survey populations: two internet-based (N = 2051; N = 2135) and a patient-research registry (N = 489), conducted between May 2017 and January 2018.ResultsExploratory and confirmatory factor analyses reduced 11 constructs to 7 gender-related variables: caregiver strain, work strain, independence, risk-taking, emotional intelligence, social support, and discrimination. Regression analyses, adjusted for age, ethnicity, income, education, sex assigned at birth, and self-reported gender identity, identified associations between these gender-related variables and self-rated general health, physical and mental health, and health-risk behaviors.ConclusionOur new instrument represents an important step toward developing more comprehensive and precise survey-based measures of gender in relation to health. Our questionnaire is designed to shed light on how specific gender-related behaviors and attitudes contribute to health and disease processes, irrespective of-or in addition to-biological sex and self-reported gender identity. Use of these gender-related variables in experimental studies, such as clinical trials, may also help us understand if gender factors play an important role as treatment-effect modifiers and would thus need to be further considered in treatment decision-making.
Project description:BackgroundAs India's accredited social health activist (ASHA) community health worker (CHW) programme enters its second decade, we take stock of the research undertaken and whether it examines the health systems interfaces required to sustain the programme at scale.MethodsWe systematically searched three databases for articles on ASHAs published between 2005 and 2016. Articles that met the inclusion criteria underwent analysis using an inductive CHW-health systems interface framework.ResultsA total of 122 academic articles were identified (56 quantitative, 29 mixed methods, 28 qualitative, and 9 commentary or synthesis); 44 articles reported on special interventions and 78 on the routine ASHA program. Findings on special interventions were overwhelmingly positive, with few negative or mixed results. In contrast, 55% of articles on the routine ASHA programme showed mixed findings and 23% negative, with few indicating overall positive findings, reflecting broader system constraints. Over half the articles had a health system perspective, including almost all those on general ASHA work, but only a third of those with a health condition focus. The most extensively researched health systems topics were ASHA performance, training and capacity-building, with very little research done on programme financing and reporting, ASHA grievance redressal or peer communication. Research tended to be descriptive, with fewer influence, explanatory or exploratory articles, and no predictive or emancipatory studies. Indian institutions and authors led and partnered on most of the research, wrote all the critical commentaries, and published more studies with negative results.ConclusionPublished work on ASHAs highlights a range of small-scale innovations, but also showcases the challenges faced by a programme at massive scale, situated in the broader health system. As the programme continues to evolve, critical comparative research that constructively feeds back into programme reforms is needed, particularly related to governance, intersectoral linkages, ASHA solidarity, and community capacity to provide support and oversight.
Project description:IntroductionThe growing number of survivors of childhood cancer, with many years of life ahead, demonstrates the increasing clinical and public health relevance of investigating the risks of social and socioeconomic impairment after a childhood cancer diagnosis and the life-saving treatment. To enrich understanding of the mental, social and socioeconomic difficulties that childhood cancer survivors may face during their life-course, identify particularly vulnerable survivors and overcome the limitations of previous research, we initiated the Socioeconomic Consequences in Adult Life after Childhood Cancer in Scandinavia (SALiCCS) research programme.MethodsThis Nordic cross-border research programme is a collaboration between the Danish Cancer Society, the Finnish Cancer Registry and Karolinska Institutet to investigate a broad range of mental, social and socioeconomic conditions in long-term childhood cancer survivors in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. SALiCCS is based on a registry-based matched cohort design, comprising five-year survivors of cancer diagnosed at ages 0-19 years (1971-2008 in Denmark, 1971-2009 in Finland, 1971-2011 in Sweden), age-, sex- and country-matched population comparisons and sibling comparisons who were followed over time. Outcomes of interest included mental disorders, educational achievements, employment and profession, family life and the need of social security benefits. Individual-level data linkage among various national registries provided the data for the research programme.ResultsThe SALiCCS core population comprises 21,292 five-year survivors, 103,303 population comparisons and 29,644 siblings as a second comparison group. The most common diagnoses in survivors were central nervous system tumours, leukaemias and lymphomas.DiscussionSALiCCS is the largest, most comprehensive population-based research initiative in this field, based on high-quality registry data with minimal risk of bias. The findings will be informative for evidence-based survivorship care targeting not only somatic late effects but also psychosocial impairments.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Access to qualitative and equitable healthcare is a major challenge in Mauritania. In order to support the country's efforts, a health sector strengthening programme was set up with participatory action research at its core. Reinforcing a health system requires a customised and comprehensive approach to face the complexity inherent to health systems. Yet, limited knowledge is available on how policies could enhance the performance of the system and how multi-stakeholder efforts could give rise to changes in health policy. We aimed to analyse the ongoing participatory action research and, more specifically, see in how far action research as an embedded research approach could contribute to strengthening health systems. METHODS:We adopted a single-case study design, based on two subunits of analysis, i.e., two selected districts. Qualitative data were collected by analysing country and programme documents, conducting 12 semi-structured interviews and performing participatory observations. Interviewees were selected based on their current position and participation in the programme. The data analysis was designed to address the objectives of the study, but evolved according to emerging insights and through triangulation and identification of emergent and/or recurrent themes along the process. RESULTS:An evaluation of the progress made in the two districts indicates that continuous capacity-building and empowerment efforts through a participative approach have been key elements to enhance dialogue between, and ownership of, the actors at the local health system level. However, the strong hierarchical structure of the Mauritanian health system and its low level of decentralisation constituted substantial barriers to innovation. Other constraints were sociocultural and organisational in nature. Poor work ethics due to a weak environmental support system played an important role. While aiming for an alignment between the flexible iterative approach of action research and the prevailing national linear planning process is quite challenging, effects on policy formulation and implementation were not observed. An adequate time frame, the engagement of proactive leaders, maintenance of a sustained dialogue and a pragmatic, flexible approach could further facilitate the process of change. CONCLUSION:Our study showcases that the action research approach used in Mauritania can usher local and national actors towards change within the health system strengthening programme when certain conditions are met. An inclusive, participatory approach generates dynamics of engagement that can facilitate ownership and strengthen capacity. Continuous evaluation is needed to measure how these processes can further develop and presume a possible effect at policy level.
Project description:BackgroundEvidence based practice enhances service planning and delivery, clinical decision making and patient care. However, health professionals often lack the time and opportunity to access or generate evidence. Research capacity building is thus an important mechanism for improving health service delivery. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a UK-wide Nurse and Allied Health Professional musculoskeletal research internship programme in which graduates applied to undertake their internship through one of five Higher Education Institutions. The evaluation explores the experiences of interns and their mentors.MethodsSixteen new graduates completed the internship programme (September 2015 - August 2018). Twelve interns and thirteen mentors participated in the evaluation. The evaluation used qualitative asynchronous email-based interviews to explore the experiences of interns and mentors. Interpretive phenomenological analysis of coded transcripts identified principal themes.ResultsEarly research outputs from the interns include three peer reviewed publications and 21 conference abstract presentations. Two interns were in full time research at the time of interview or had a research component in their clinical role. Nine interns in clinical posts disclosed plans to return to research in the near future. Seven themes were identified: the impact on interns' careers; personal impact (for example, influence on self-confidence); impact on clinical practice; drivers for applying; intervention design (for example, attitudes concerning the timing and duration of the intervention); mentorship and networking (including general support provided and quality of career advice); challenges.ConclusionThe internship programme is an effective model in building research capacity in musculoskeletal research for Nurses and Allied Health Professionals, influencing careers, building confidence and improving clinical practice. The internship programme has the potential to be replicable to other clinical contexts nationally and internationally.