WHO fungal priority pathogens list to guide research, development and public health action

Infectious diseases are among the top causes of mortality and a leading cause of disability worldwide. Drug-resistant bacterial infections are estimated to directly cause 1.27 million deaths and to contribute to approximately 4.95 million deaths every year, with the greatest burden in resource- limited settings. Against the backdrop of this major global health threat, invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) are rising overall and particularly among immunocompromised populations. The diagnosis and treatment of IFDs are challenged by limited access to quality diagnostics and treatment as well as emergence of antifungal resistance in many settings. Despite the growing concern, fungal infections receive very little attention and resources, leading to a paucity of quality data on fungal disease distribution and antifungal resistance patterns. Consequently, it is impossible to estimate their exact burden. In 2017, WHO developed its first bacterial priority pathogens list (WHO BPPL) in the context of increasing antibacterial resistance to help galvanize global action, including the research and development (R&D) of new treatments. Inspired by the BPPL, WHO has now developed the first fungal priority pathogens list (WHO FPPL). The WHO FPPL is the first global effort to systematically prioritize fungal pathogens, considering their unmet R&D needs and perceived public health importance. The WHO FPPL aims to focus and drive further research and policy interventions to strengthen the global response to fungal infections and antifungal resistance. The development of the list followed a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach. The prioritization process focused on fungal pathogens that can cause invasive acute and subacute systemic fungal infections for which drug resistance or other treatment and management challenges exist. The pathogens included were ranked, then categorized into three priority groups (critical, high, and medium). The critical group includes Cryptococcus neoformans, Candida auris, Aspergillus fumigatus and Candida albicans. The high group includes Nakaseomyces glabrata (Candida glabrata), Histoplasma spp., eumycetoma causative agents, Mucorales, Fusarium spp., Candida tropicalis and Candida parapsilosis. Finally, pathogens in the medium group are Scedosporium spp., Lomentospora prolificans, Coccidioides spp., Pichia kudriavzeveii (Candida krusei), Cryptococcus gattii, Talaromyces marneffei, Pneumocystis jirovecii and Paracoccidioides spp. This document proposes actions and strategies for policymakers, public health professionals and other stakeholders, targeted at improving the overall response to these priority fungal pathogens, including preventing the development of antifungal drug resistance. Three primary areas for action are proposed, focusing on: (1) strengthening laboratory capacity and surveillance; (2) sustainable investments in research, development, and innovation; and (3) public health interventions. Countries are encouraged to improve their mycology diagnostic capacity to manage fungal infections and to perform surveillance. In most contexts, this might require a stepwise approach. There is a need for sustainable investments in research, development, and innovation. More investments are needed in basic mycology research, R&D of antifungal medicines and diagnostics. Innovative approaches are needed to optimize and standardize the use of current diagnostic modalities globally. In addition, public health interventions are needed to highlight the importance of fungal infections, including through incorporating fungal diseases and priority pathogens in medical (clinical) and public health training programmes and curricula at all levels of training. Similarly, collaboration across sectors is required to address the impact of antifungal use on resistance across the One Health spectrum. Finally, regional variations and national contexts need to be taken into consideration while implementing the WHO FPPL to inform priority actions.S

A SWOT Analysis of the Various Backup Scenarios Used in Electronic Medical Record Systems

Objectives: Electronic medical records (EMRs) are increasingly being used by health care services. Currently, if an EMR shutdown occurs, even for a moment, patient safety and care can be seriously impacted. Our goal was to determine the methodology needed to develop an effective and reliable EMR backup system. Methods: Our "independent backup system by medical organizations " paradigm implies that individual medical organizations develop their own EMR backup systems within their organizations. A "personal independent backup system " is defined as an individual privately managing his/her own medical records, whereas in a "central backup system by the government " the government controls all the data. A "central backup system by private enterprises " implies that individual companies retain control over their own data. A "cooperative backup system among medical organizations " refers to a networked system established through mutual agreement. The "backup system based on mutual trust between an individual and an organization " means that the medical information backup system at the organizational level is established through mutual trust. Results: Through the use of SWOT analysis it can be shown that cooperative backup among medical organizations is possible to be established through a network composed of various medical agencies and that it can be managed systematically. An owner of medical information only grants data access to the specific person who gave the authorization for backup based on the mutual trust between an individual and an organization. Conclusions: By employing SWOT analysis, we concluded that a linkage among medical organizations or between a

Who needs what from a national health research system: Lessons from reforms to the English Department of Health's R&D system

This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Health research systems consist of diverse groups who have some role in health research, but the boundaries around such a system are not clear-cut. To explore what various stakeholders need we reviewed the literature including that on the history of English health R&D reforms, and we also applied some relevant conceptual frameworks. We first describe the needs and capabilities of the main groups of stakeholders in health research systems, and explain key features of policymaking systems within which these stakeholders operate in the UK. The five groups are policymakers (and health care managers), health professionals, patients and the general public, industry, and researchers. As individuals and as organisations they have a range of needs from the health research system, but should also develop specific capabilities in order to contribute effectively to the system and benefit from it. Second, we discuss key phases of reform in the development of the English health research system over four decades - especially that of the English Department of Health's R&D system - and identify how far legitimate demands of key stakeholder interests were addressed. Third, in drawing lessons we highlight points emerging from contemporary reports, but also attempt to identify issues through application of relevant conceptual frameworks. The main lessons are: the importance of comprehensively addressing the diverse needs of various interacting institutions and stakeholders; the desirability of developing facilitating mechanisms at interfaces between the health research system and its various stakeholders; and the importance of additional money in being able to expand the scope of the health research system whilst maintaining support for basic science. We conclude that the latest health R&D strategy in England builds on recent progress and tackles acknowledged weaknesses. The strategy goes a considerable way to identifying and more effectively meeting the needs of key groups such as medical academics, patients and industry, and has been remarkably successful in increasing the funding for health research. There are still areas that might benefit from further recognition and resourcing, but the lessons identified, and progress made by the reforms are relevant for the design and coordination of national health research systems beyond England.This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund

Childhood disability in Turkana, Kenya:Understanding how carers cope in a complex humanitarian setting

Background: Although the consequences of disability are magnified in humanitarian contexts, research into the difficulties of caring for children with a disability in such settings has received limited attention.Methods: Based on in-depth interviews with 31 families, key informants and focus group discussions in Turkana, Kenya, this article explores the lives of families caring for children with a range of impairments (hearing, vision, physical and intellectual) in a complex humanitarian context characterised by drought, flooding, armed conflict, poverty and historical marginalisation.Results: The challenging environmental and social conditions of Turkana magnified not only the impact of impairment on children, but also the burden of caregiving. The remoteness of Turkana, along with the paucity and fragmentation of health, rehabilitation and social services, posed major challenges and created opportunity costs for families. Disability-related stigma isolated mothers of children with disabilities, especially, increasing their burden of care and further limiting their access to services and humanitarian programmes. In a context where social systems are already stressed, the combination of these factors compounded the vulnerabilities faced by children with disabilities and their families.Conclusion: The needs of children with disabilities and their carers in Turkana are not being met by either community social support systems or humanitarian aid programmes. There is an urgent need to mainstream disability into Turkana services and programmes.</jats:p

The state of One Health research across disciplines and sectors:a bibliometric analysis

There is a growing interest in One Health, reflected by the rising number of publications relating to One Health literature, but also through zoonotic disease outbreaks becoming more frequent, such as Ebola, Zika virus and COVID-19. This paper uses bibliometric analysis to explore the state of One Health in academic literature, to visualise the characteristics and trends within the field through a network analysis of citation patterns and bibliographic links. The analysis focuses on publication trends, co-citation network of scientific journals, co-citation network of authors, and co-occurrence of keywords. The bibliometric analysis showed an increasing interest for One Health in academic research. However, it revealed some thematic and disciplinary shortcomings, in particular with respect to the inclusion of environmental themes and social science insights pertaining to the implementation of One Health policies. The analysis indicated that there is a need for more applicable approaches to strengthen intersectoral collaboration and knowledge sharing. Silos between the disciplines of human medicine, veterinary medicine and environment still persist. Engaging researchers with different expertise and disciplinary backgrounds will facilitate a more comprehensive perspective where the human-animal-environment interface is not researched as separate entities but as a coherent whole. Further, journals dedicated to One Health or interdisciplinary research provide scholars the possibility to publish multifaceted research. These journals are uniquely positioned to bridge between fields, strengthen interdisciplinary research and create room for social science approaches alongside of medical and natural sciences. OHEJP PhD project: SUSTAI

Research collaboration in Tehran University of Medical Sciences: two decades after integration

Background: In 1985 medical schools were integrated into the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Health and Medical Education was created in Iran. Under this infrastructure education, research and service provision are unified, and it is expected that collaboration between researchers and decision makers become easier in such an integrated context. The question here is how the researchers behavior in the biggest medical university of the country towards collaboration is, i.e. how much do decision makers participate in different stages of research? Which factors affect it? Methodology: The samples under study were all Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) completed research projects that had gotten grants in 2004 and were over by the time this study was done. Two questionnaires were designed for this study: i) the research checklist which was filled for 301 projects, ii) the researcher's questionnaire, which was sent to principle investigators, 208 of which were collected. Multiple linear regression analysis was used for evaluating the potential factors affecting individuals 'collaboration score'. Results: Only 2.2 percent of TUMS' projects initiated in 2004 have had collaboration as a joint PI or co-investigator from non-academic organizations. The principle investigators mean collaboration score was 2.09, where 6 was the total score. So the collaboration score obtained was 35%. The 'type of research' had significant association with the collaboration score which is shown in the linear regression; collaboration was seen more in clinical (p = 0.007) and health system researches (p = 0.001) as compared to basic research. Conclusion: The present study shows that not many individuals collaborated as co-investigators from outside the university. This finding shows that research policy makers need to introduce interventions in this field. And assessment of barriers to collaboration and its facilitating factors should be considered in order to make it actually happen. © 2009 Majdzadeh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 1976-2014.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo has experienced the most outbreaks of Ebola virus disease since the virus' discovery in 1976. This article provides for the first time a description and a line list for all outbreaks in this country, comprising 996 cases. Compared to patients over 15 years old, the odds of dying were significantly lower in patients aged 5 to 15 and higher in children under five (with 100% mortality in those under 2 years old). The odds of dying increased by 11% per day that a patient was not hospitalised. Outbreaks with an initially high reproduction number, R (>3), were rapidly brought under control, whilst outbreaks with a lower initial R caused longer and generally larger outbreaks. These findings can inform the choice of target age groups for interventions and highlight the importance of both reducing the delay between symptom onset and hospitalisation and rapid national and international response

Incidence, risk factors and treatment of diarrhoea among Dutch travellers: reasons not to routinely prescribe antibiotics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Travellers' diarrhoea (TD) is the most common infectious disease among travellers. In the Netherlands, stand-by or prophylactic antibiotics are not routinely prescribed to travellers. This study prospectively assessed the incidence rate, risk factors, and treatment of TD among immunocompetent travellers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Persons who attended the travel clinic of the Public Health Service Amsterdam in 2006-2007 before short-term travel to tropical and subtropical countries were invited to answer a questionnaire regarding sociodemographics and travel purpose; they were also asked to keep a daily structured travel diary, recording their itinerary, symptoms, and self-medication or consultation with a doctor. Diarrhoea episodes containing blood or mucous were considered severe.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 1202 travellers, the median age was 38 years, and the median travel duration 3 weeks. Of all episodes, 96% were mild. The median duration of TD was 2 days and significantly shorter in subsequent episodes compared to first episodes (p < 0.0005). Of first episodes 38% started in the first travel week. The incidence rate (IR) for first episodes was 2.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.30-2.70) per 100 travel days, with the highest IR among travellers to South-Central and West Asia. The IR for first and subsequent episodes was comparable. Risk factors for first episodes included female sex, a Western country of birth, and tourism as the purpose of travel. The lowest risk was in travellers to South America. An independent risk factor for subsequent episodes was female sex. In total, 5% of travellers used antibiotics; of those, 92% had mild diarrhoea, and 53% received antibiotics over the counter.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>TD is common among travellers, but the overall course is mild, not requiring treatment. The incidence rates for first and second episodes are comparable. Female sex is a risk factor for the first episode, as well as subsequent ones. Prescription antibiotics are not needed in short-term healthy travellers.</p