The role of multilateral organizations and governments in advancing social innovation in health care delivery

Abstract Background Despite great medical advances and scientific progress over the past century, one billion people globally still lack access to basic health care services. In the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development social innovation models aim to provide effective solutions that bridge the health care delivery gap, address equity and create social value. This commentary highlights the roles of multilateral organizations and governments in creating an enabling environment where social innovations can more effectively integrate into health systems to maximize their impact on beneficiaries. Main text The integration of social innovations into health systems is essential to ensure their sustainability and the wide dissemination of their impact. Effective partnerships, strong engagement with and endorsement by governments and communities, regulations, trust and sometimes willingness are key factors to enhance system integration, replication and dissemination of the models. Three examples of social innovations selected by the Social Innovation in Health Initiative illustrate the importance of engaging with governments and communities in order to link, integrate and synergize their efforts. Key challenges that they encountered, and lessons learnt are highlighted. Multilateral organizations and governments increasingly engage in promoting and supporting the development, testing and dissemination of social innovations to address the health care delivery gap. They play an important role in creating an enabling environment. This includes promoting the concept of social innovation in health care delivery, spreading social innovation approach and lessons learnt, fostering partnerships and leveraging resources, convening communities, health system actors and various stakeholders to work together across disciplines and sectors, and nurturing capacity in countries. Conclusions Multilateral organizations and local and national governments have a critical role to play in creating an enabling environment where social innovations can flourish. In supporting and disseminating social innovation approach, multilateral organizations and governments have a great opportunity to accelerate Universal Health Coverage and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals

Social innovation in health: a critical but overlooked component of the COVID-19 pandemic response

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly disrupted the provision of health services across the globe. Travel to hospitals is restricted and many health facilities have limited services, deepening financial problems for some clinics and hospitals.1 Vulnerable groups who are already marginalised by their gender, race or nationality have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19.2 In response, social innovations have been developed to protect vulnerable groups and rapidly pivot health systems towards COVID-19. Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions that meet the needs of end users through a multistakeholder, community-engaged process to address the healthcare delivery gap.3 Social innovation is particularly well suited for the COVID-19 response because it focuses on local needs, develops low-cost solutions and builds on community strengths (figure 1). In partnership with partner academic institutions, the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases launched the Social Innovation in Health Initiative (SIHI) in 2014. SIHI focuses on research, training and advocacy related to social innovation in health. In collaboration with partners, the network organised an online open event to discuss social innovation responses to emergencies.4 This piece highlights how social innovation has contributed to the COVID-19 response and presents three examples of social innovation projects that have adapted to the pandemic. These examples demonstrate how social innovation during COVID-19 has mobilised local communities, swiftly adapted existing health services and built strong partnerships

Social innovation research checklist: A crowdsourcing open call and digital hackathon to develop a checklist for research to advance social innovation in health.

While social innovations in health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovations. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. This article describes the development of a 17-item social innovation in health research checklist to assess and report social innovation projects and provides examples of good reporting. The checklist is adapted from the TIDieR checklist and will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting and increase end user engagement. SUMMARY POINTS: While many social innovations have been developed and shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate social innovationThe Social Innovation in Health Research Checklist, the first of its kind, is a 17-item checklist to improve reporting completeness and promote transparency in the development, implementation, and evaluation of social innovations in healthThe research checklist was developed through a three-step process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a three-round modified Delphi processUse of this research checklist will enable researchers, innovators and partners to learn more about the process and results of social innovation in health research

Social Innovation For Health Research: Development of the SIFHR Checklist

BACKGROUND: Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions to address the healthcare delivery gap that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process. While social innovations for health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovation. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The research checklist was developed through a 3-step community-engaged process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a 3-round modified Delphi process. The call for entries solicited checklists and related items and was open between November 27, 2019 and February 1, 2020. In addition to the open call submissions and scoping review findings, a 17-item Social Innovation For Health Research (SIFHR) Checklist was developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist. The checklist was then refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys conducted between May and June 2020. The resulting checklist will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting, increase end-user engagement, and help assess social innovation projects. A limitation of the open call was requiring internet access, which likely discouraged participation of some subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The SIFHR Checklist will strengthen the reporting of social innovation for health research studies. More research is needed on social innovation for health

Research capacity strengthening in low and middle income countries - an evaluation of the WHO/TDR career development fellowship programme

Between August 2012 and April 2013 the Career Development Fellowship programme of the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (World Health Organization) underwent an external evaluation to assess its past performance and determine recommendations for future programme development and continuous performance improvement. The programme provides a year-long training experience for qualified researchers from low and middle income countries at pharmaceutical companies or product development partnerships. Independent evaluators from the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute and the Barcelona Institute for Global Health used a results-based methodology to review the programme. Data were gathered through document review, surveys, and interviews with a range of programme participants. The final evaluation report found the Career Development Fellowship to be relevant to organizers' and programme objectives, efficient in its operations, and effective in its training scheme, which was found to address needs and gaps for both fellows and their home institutions. Evaluators found that the programme has the potential for impact and sustainability beyond the programme period, especially with the successful reintegration of fellows into their home institutions, through which newly-developed skills can be shared at the institutional level. Recommendations included the development of a scheme to support the re-integration of fellows into their home institutions post-fellowship and to seek partnerships to facilitate the scaling-up of the programme. The impact of the Professional Membership Scheme, an online professional development tool launched through the programme, beyond the scope of the Career Development Fellowship programme itself to other applications, has been identified as a positive unintended outcome. The results of this evaluation may be of interest for other efforts in the field of research capacity strengthening in LMICs or, generally, to other professional development schemes of a similar structure

Research Capacity Strengthening in Low and Middle Income Countries - An Evaluation of the WHO/TDR Career Development Fellowship Programme

Between August 2012 and April 2013 the Career Development Fellowship programme of the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (World Health Organization) underwent an external evaluation to assess its past performance and determine recommendations for future programme development and continuous performance improvement. The programme provides a year-long training experience for qualified researchers from low and middle income countries at pharmaceutical companies or product development partnerships. Independent evaluators from the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute and the Barcelona Institute for Global Health used a results-based methodology to review the programme. Data were gathered through document review, surveys, and interviews with a range of programme participants. The final evaluation report found the Career Development Fellowship to be relevant to organizers' and programme objectives, efficient in its operations, and effective in its training scheme, which was found to address needs and gaps for both fellows and their home institutions. Evaluators found that the programme has the potential for impact and sustainability beyond the programme period, especially with the successful reintegration of fellows into their home institutions, through which newly-developed skills can be shared at the institutional level. Recommendations included the development of a scheme to support the re-integration of fellows into their home institutions post-fellowship and to seek partnerships to facilitate the scaling-up of the programme. The impact of the Professional Membership Scheme, an online professional development tool launched through the programme, beyond the scope of the Career Development Fellowship programme itself to other applications, has been identified as a positive unintended outcome. The results of this evaluation may be of interest for other efforts in the field of research capacity strengthening in LMICs or, generally, to other professional development schemes of a similar structure

Social innovation in health, community engagement, financing and outcomes: qualitative analysis from the social innovation in health initiative.

BACKGROUND: Social innovation in health is a community-engaged process that links social change and health improvement, drawing on the diverse strengths of local individuals and institutions. However, there are few studies that examine community engagement, financing and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to use a qualitative descriptive analysis to assess 40 social innovations in health identified through a global open call. METHODS: This qualitative analysis examined social innovation case studies from low- and middle-income countries identified by a global social innovation network. A crowdsourcing open call identified projects and key components of each social innovation were evaluated by an independent panel. We used a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention framework to measure community engagement as shared leadership, collaboration, involvement, consultation or informing. We used descriptive statistics to examine key aspects of community engagement, financing, health outcomes and non-health outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 40 social innovations were examined. Social innovations were from Africa (21/40), Asia (11/40), and Latin America and the Caribbean (8/40). Community engagement was diverse and robust across the cases and 60% (24/40) had either shared leadership or collaboration. Financing for social innovation came from research grants (23), national or provincial government support (15), revenues from sales (13), donations (13) and local government support (10). Social innovations reported health and non-health outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate social innovations had robust community engagement. Innovative financing mechanisms provide mechanisms for sustaining social innovations. Further research on health and non-health outcomes of social innovation is needed

Participation of Fellows (n = 21) in professional activities.

<p>Since we lack pre-training data these results cannot be viewed as evidence of professional advancement attained through the CDF programme. Professional activities were prelisted, with an option to add others in freetext.</p