Politics and political determinants of health policy and systems research funding in Latin America and the Caribbean

Objectives and importance of study: The importance of health policy and systems research (HPSR) has been acknowledged since 2004 and was recognised by the United Nations World Health Assembly in 2005. However, many factors influence its development. This paper aims to analyse the impact of politics and political determinants on HPSR funding in selected countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. Methods: Using a standardised protocol, we performed an analysis of available data and financing structures for health research and HPSR based on research in eight countries, including interviews with key stakeholders (n = 42). Results: Dollar depreciation and gross national product growth in the region may play a role in how governments fund research. There have been shifts in the political spectrum in governments, which have affected research coordination and funding in positive and negative ways. HPSR funding in some countries was dependent on budget decisions and although some have improved funding, others have regressed by decreasing funding or have completely cancelled financing mechanisms. Caribbean countries rely mainly on institutional funding. HPSR is recognised as important but remains underfunded; stakeholders believed it should be used more in decision making. Conclusion: Although HPSR is recognised as valuable for decision making and policy development it does not have the financial support required to flourish in Latin America and the Carribean. Data on health research financing were not easy to access. There was little or no evidence of published reports or papers about research financing, health research funding, and HPSR funding in particular in the studied countries Because of the fragility of health systems highlighted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, HPSR should be of great relevance and value to both policy makers and funders

EQUIDAD EN SALUD PARA EL DESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE

Los notables logros del Programa Ampliado de Inmunizaciones en las Américas —a lo largo de cuatro décadas de arduo trabajo de control, eliminación y erradicación de enfermedades, discapacidades y mortalidades prevenibles— han demostrado que la universalidad en salud es alcanzable y la equidad en salud es posible.  Transformar estos objetivos aspiracionales en metas realizables y sostenerlas en el tiempo demanda estratégica y explícitamente centrar la atención en la distribución justa de las oportunidades para la salud y el bienestar, incluyendo el acceso a las vacunas y sus determinantes proximales y distales. Las desigualdades sociales en salud son ubícuas, profundas y persistentes en la Región y la evidencia disponible muestra que tales gradientes en salud se reproducen en el acceso a los servicios de inmunización y las coberturas de vacunación.  La noble aspiración por la equidad en salud es el soporte moral y político de toda propuesta por el desarrollo sostenible; la sostenibilidad misma del desarrollo dependerá del grado de equidad social logrado.  Es imperativo fortalecer la acción sobre los determinantes sociales de la salud, mediante el alcance progresivo de acceso y cobertura universales en salud, la aplicación del enfoque intersectorial de salud en todas las políticas y el fortalecimiento de capacidades institucionales para generar evidencia sobre determinación social de la salud y reducción de desigualdades sociales en salud. Dos inconfundibles lecciones regionales han de iluminar este camino: las vacunas como elemento ecualizador en la salud pública y los programas de inmunización como práctica exitosa de universalidad en salud.ABSTRACTThe remarkable achievements of the Expanded Programme on Immunization in the Americas —across four decades of hard work in the control, elimination, and eradication of diseases, disabilities, and preventable deaths— have shown that, indeed, universality in health is attainable and equity in health is possible. Transforming these aspirational objectives into achievable goals and sustaining them over time demand an strategic and explicit focus on the fair distribution of opportunities for health and well-being, including access to vaccines and their proximal and distal determinants. Social inequalities in health are ubiquitous, deeply entrenched, and persistent in the Region; the available evidence shows that such gradients in health are reproduced in access to immunization services and vaccination coverage. The noble aspiration for equity in health is the moral and political support of any proposal for sustainable development; actually, the very sustainability of development will depend on the degree of social equity achieved. It is imperative to strengthen the action on the social determinants of health, through the progressive realization of universal health access and coverage, implementation of the intersectoral approach to Health-in-All-Policies, and by building institutional capacity to generate evidence on social determination of health and reduction of social inequalities in health. Two distinct regional lessons shall illuminate this path: vaccines as an equalizer element in public health and immunization programmes as a successful practice of universality in health.Key words:   Equity, Health, sustainable development, Equity, Health, sustainable development.Palabras claves: Equidad, Salud, Desarrollo Sostenibl

Women's health in the Region of the Americas

Sem informação374-519920

Governance, priorities and policies in national research for health systems in West Africa (Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone)

Contributions to the content of this paper through interviews, presentations and mapping exercises were made by country teams present at the March 2011 Dakar workshopWorkshop objectives (2011) identified shared problems that could be tackled through collective strategies, and action plans to be tailored to each country (Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali and Sierra Leone). Goals for research for health (R4H) system strengthening were identified as priority areas for development in the four countries. The papers provide a descriptive review of key elements of the national health research systems in each country, and present a cross-country comparison, highlighting similarities and differences in country needs and challenges with respect to R4H system development

Bridging the gaps among research, policy and practice in ten low- and middle-income countries: Development and testing of a questionnaire for researchers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A questionnaire could assist researchers, policymakers, and healthcare providers to describe and monitor changes in efforts to bridge the gaps among research, policy and practice. No questionnaire focused on researchers' engagement in bridging activities related to high-priority topics (or the potential correlates of their engagement) has been developed and tested in a range of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Country teams from ten LMICs (China, Ghana, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Laos, Mexico, Pakistan, Senegal, and Tanzania) participated in the development and testing of a questionnaire. To assess reliability we calculated the internal consistency of items within each of the ten conceptual domains related to bridging activities (specifically Cronbach's alpha). To assess face and content validity we convened several teleconferences and a workshop. To assess construct validity we calculated the correlation between scales and counts (i.e., criterion measures) for the three countries that employed both and we calculated the correlation between different but theoretically related (i.e., convergent) measures for all countries.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for sets of related items was very high, ranging from 0.89 (0.86-0.91) to 0.96 (0.95-0.97), suggesting some item redundancy. Both face and content validity were determined to be high. Assessments of construct validity using criterion-related measures showed statistically significant associations for related measures (with gammas ranging from 0.36 to 0.73). Assessments using convergent measures also showed significant associations (with gammas ranging from 0.30 to 0.50).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>While no direct comparison can be made to a comparable questionnaire, our findings do suggest a number of strengths of the questionnaire but also the need to reduce item redundancy and to test its capacity to monitor changes over time.</p

Health Research Web (HRWeb) : key information for health research management; the 54th Annual Council, Saint Lucia, April 22nd, 2009

PowerPoint presentationThis presentation by the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) reviews objectives of the Health Research Web (HRWeb) in terms of health research management, which enables informed decision making at the national level. Added functionalities of the HRWeb Platform include: facilitating social networking; provision of statistic assessments; links to research ethics legislation and guidelines; a log of search history; and private user groups. It also provides links to relevant sites: Evidence-Informed Policy Network (EVIPNet), TropiKA.net, BIREME (Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences, and others

Perspectives on the methods of a large systematic mapping of maternal health interventions.

BACKGROUND: Mapping studies describe a broad body of literature, and differ from classical systematic reviews, which assess more narrowly-defined questions and evaluate the quality of the studies included in the review. While the steps involved in mapping studies have been described previously, a detailed qualitative account of the methodology could inform the design of future mapping studies. OBJECTIVES: Describe the perspectives of a large research team on the methods used and collaborative experiences in a study that mapped the literature published on maternal health interventions in low- and middle-income countries (2292 full text articles included, after screening 35,048 titles and abstracts in duplicate). METHODS: Fifteen members of the mapping team, drawn from eight countries, provided their experiences and perspectives of the study in response to a list of questions and probes. The responses were collated and analysed thematically following a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: The objectives of the mapping evolved over time, posing difficulties in ensuring a uniform understanding of the purpose of the mapping among the team members. Ambiguity of some study variables and modifications in data extraction codes were the main threats to the quality of data extraction. The desire for obtaining detailed information on a few topics needed to be weighed against the benefits of collecting more superficial data on a wider range of topics. Team members acquired skills in systematic review methodology and software, and a broad knowledge of maternal health literature. Participation in analysis and dissemination was lower than during the screening of articles for eligibility and data coding. Though all respondents believed the workload involved was high, study outputs were viewed as novel and important contributions to evidence. Overall, most believed there was a favourable balance between the amount of work done and the project's outputs. CONCLUSIONS: A large mapping of literature is feasible with a committed team aiming to build their research capacity, and with a limited, simplified set of data extraction codes. In the team's view, the balance between the time spent on the review, and the outputs and skills acquired was favourable. Assessments of the value of a mapping need, however, to take into account the limitations inherent in such exercises, especially the exclusion of grey literature and of assessments of the quality of the studies identified

Mapping of research on maternal health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a review of 2292 publications between 2000 and 2012.

BACKGROUND: Progress in achieving maternal health goals and the rates of reductions in deaths from individual conditions have varied over time and across countries. Assessing whether research priorities in maternal health align with the main causes of mortality, and those factors responsible for inequitable health outcomes, such as health system performance, may help direct future research. The study thus investigated whether the research done in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) matched the principal causes of maternal deaths in these settings. METHODS: Systematic mapping was done of maternal health interventional research in LMICs from 2000 to 2012. Articles were included on health systems strengthening, health promotion; and on five tracer conditions (haemorrhage, hypertension, malaria, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs)). Following review of 35,078 titles and abstracts in duplicate, data were extracted from 2292 full-text publications. RESULTS: Over time, the number of publications rose several-fold, especially in 2004-2007, and the range of methods used broadened considerably. More than half the studies were done in sub-Saharan Africa (55.4 %), mostly addressing HIV and malaria. This region had low numbers of publications per hypertension and haemorrhage deaths, though South Asia had even fewer. The proportion of studies set in East Asia Pacific dropped steadily over the period, and in Latin America from 2008 to 2012. By 2008-2012, 39.1 % of articles included health systems components and 30.2 % health promotion. Only 5.4 % of studies assessed maternal STI interventions, diminishing with time. More than a third of haemorrhage research included health systems or health promotion components, double that of HIV research. CONCLUSION: Several mismatches were noted between research publications, and the burden and causes of maternal deaths. This is especially true for South Asia; haemorrhage and hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa; and for STIs worldwide. The large rise in research outputs and range of methods employed indicates a major expansion in the number of researchers and their skills. This bodes well for maternal health if variations in research priorities across settings and topics are corrected