Public participation in decision-making on the coverage of new antivirals for hepatitis C.

Purpose - New hepatitis C medicines such as sofosbuvir underline the need to balance considerations of innovation, clinical evidence, budget impact and equity in health priority-setting. The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of public participation in addressing these considerations. Design/methodology/approach - The paper employs a comparative case study approach. It explores the experience of four countries - Brazil, England, South Korea and the USA - in making coverage decisions about the antiviral sofosbuvir and involving the public and patients in these decision-making processes. Findings - Issues emerging from public participation ac tivities include the role of the universal right to health in Brazil, the balance between innovation and budget impact in England, the effect of unethical medical practices on public perception in South Korea and the legitimacy of priority-setting processes in the USA. Providing policymakers are receptive to these issues, public participation activities may be re-conceptualized as processes that illuminate policy problems relevant to a particular context, thereby promoting an agenda-setting role for the public. Originality/value - The paper offers an empirical analysis of public involvement in the case of sofosbuvir, where the relevant considerations that bear on priority-setting decisions have been particularly stark. The perspectives that emerge suggest that public participation contributes to raising attention to issues that need to be addressed by policymakers. Public participation activities can thus contribute to setting policy agendas, even if that is not their explicit purpose. However, the actualization of this contribution is contingent on the receptiveness of policymakers.This is the author accepted manuscript. It is currently under an indefinite embargo pending publication by Emerald

Advancing HIV research with pregnant women: navigating challenges and opportunities

Concerns about including pregnant women in research have led to a dearth of evidence to guide safe and effective treatment and prevention of HIV in pregnancy. To better understand why these evidence gaps persist and inform guidance for responsible inclusion of pregnant women in the HIV research agenda, we aimed to learn what HIV experts perceive as barriers and constraints to conducting this research

Pregnant women & vaccines against emerging epidemic threats: Ethics guidance for preparedness, research, and response

Zika virus, influenza, and Ebola have called attention to the ways in which infectious disease outbreaks can severely – and at times uniquely – affect the health interests of pregnant women and their offspring. These examples also highlight the critical need to proactively consider pregnant women and their offspring in vaccine research and response efforts to combat emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. Historically, pregnant women and their offspring have been largely excluded from research agendas and investment strategies for vaccines against epidemic threats, which in turn can lead to exclusion from future vaccine campaigns amidst outbreaks. This state of affairs is profoundly unjust to pregnant women and their offspring, and deeply problematic from the standpoint of public health. To ensure that the needs of pregnant women and their offspring are fairly addressed, new approaches to public health preparedness, vaccine research and development, and vaccine delivery are required. This Guidance offers 22 concrete recommendations that provide a roadmap for the ethically responsible, socially just, and respectful inclusion of the interests of pregnant women in the development and deployment of vaccines against emerging pathogens. The Guidance was developed by the Pregnancy Research Ethics for Vaccines, Epidemics, and New Technologies (PREVENT) Working Group – a multidisciplinary, international team of 17 experts specializing in bioethics, maternal immunization, maternal-fetal medicine, obstetrics, pediatrics, philosophy, public health, and vaccine research and policy – in consultation with a variety of external experts and stakeholders.Fil: Krubiner, Carleigh B.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Faden, Ruth R.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Karron, Ruth A.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Little, Margaret O.. University Of Georgetown; Estados UnidosFil: Lyerly, Anne D.. University of North Carolina; Estados UnidosFil: Abramson, Jon S.. University Wake Forest; Estados UnidosFil: Beigi, Richard H.. Magee-Womens Hospital of University of Pittsburgh Medical Center; Estados UnidosFil: Cravioto, Alejandro R.. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Durbin, Anna P.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Gellin, Bruce G.. Sabin Vaccine Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Gupta, Swati B.. IAVI; Estados UnidosFil: Kaslow, David C.. PATH; Estados UnidosFil: Kochhar, Sonali. Global Healthcare Consulting; IndiaFil: Luna, Florencia. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Saenz, Carla. Pan American Health Organization; Estados UnidosFil: Sheffield, Jeanne S.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Tindana, Paulina O.. Navrongo Health Research Centre; GhanaFil: The Prevent Working Group. No especifíca

Economic Returns to Investment in AIDS Treatment in Low and Middle Income Countries

Since the early 2000s, aid organizations and developing country governments have invested heavily in AIDS treatment. By 2010, more than five million people began receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) – yet each year, 2.7 million people are becoming newly infected and another two million are dying without ever having received treatment. As the need for treatment grows without commensurate increase in the amount of available resources, it is critical to assess the health and economic gains being realized from increasingly large investments in ART. This study estimates total program costs and compares them with selected economic benefits of ART, for the current cohort of patients whose treatment is cofinanced by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. At end 2011, 3.5 million patients in low and middle income countries will be receiving ART through treatment programs cofinanced by the Global Fund. Using 2009 ART prices and program costs, we estimate that the discounted resource needs required for maintaining this cohort are $14.2 billion for the period 2011–2020. This investment is expected to save 18.5 million life-years and return$12 to $34 billion through increased labor productivity, averted orphan care, and deferred medical treatment for opportunistic infections and end-of-life care. Under alternative assumptions regarding the labor productivity effects of HIV infection, AIDS disease, and ART, the monetary benefits range from 81 percent to 287 percent of program costs over the same period. These results suggest that, in addition to the large health gains generated, the economic benefits of treatment will substantially offset, and likely exceed, program costs within 10 years of investment

A bioethical framework for health systems activity: a conceptual exploration applying ‘systems thinking’

© 2014, Copyright © 2014, Operational Research Society Ltd. Recognizing that the health system is a complex and dynamic network of actors and activities, this paper seeks to push the field of bioethics to develop a more holistic approach from the health systems perspective. Expanding upon the work of existing public health frameworks and drawing upon concepts from related areas such as governance, human rights, and organizational ethics, our provisional list of ethical considerations for health systems fall under the following categories: Holism, Sustainability, Evidence & Effectiveness, Efficiency, Public Engagement & Transparency, Accountability & Feedback, Equity & Empowerment, Justice & Fairness, Responsiveness, Collaboration, and Quality. By outlining these key domains, we hope to stimulate global discussion and further development of an ethics framework that will help guide ongoing work to strengthen health systems. This will be particularly important for low- and middle-income countries where resources are highly constrained and health systems efforts have scaled-up dramatically in the past decade

Exploring the ethics of long-term research engagement with communities in low- and middle-income countries

Over the past few decades, there has been increasing attention focused on the ethics of health research, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Despite the increasing focus on the literature addressing human protection, community engagement, appropriate consent procedures and ways to mitigate concerns around exploitation, there has been little discussion about how the duration of the research engagement may affect the ethical design and implementation of studies. In other words, what are the unique ethical challenges when researchers engage with host communities for longer periods (10 years or more), and what special considerations does this time commitment generate when applying ethical principles to these kinds of studies? This article begins to outline key areas of ethical concern that arise during long-term, sustained research activities with communities in low-resource settings. Through a review of the literature and consultations with experts in health systems, we identified the following key themes: fair benefits and long-term beneficence; community autonomy, consultation and consent; impacts on local health systems; economic impacts of research participation; ethical review processes; and institutional processes and oversight within research organizations. We hope that this preliminary exploration will stimulate further dialogue and help inform ethical guidance around long-term research engagements in the developing world. © 2012 The Author 2012

Ethics, pregnancy, and ZIKV vaccine research & development

The rapid spread of the Zika virus (ZIKV) has galvanized the global public health community toward development of ZIKV vaccines. The most dire consequence of ZIKV infection, Congenital ZIKV Syndrome (CZS), results from infection during pregnancy. As a consequence, pregnant women figure prominently in global concerns about ZIKV. They should also figure prominently in ZIKV vaccine development, but the way forward is not well established.Fil: Faden, Ruth R.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Krubiner, Carleigh B.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Lyerly, Anne D.. University of North Carolina; Estados UnidosFil: Little, Margaret O.. University Of Georgetown; Estados UnidosFil: August, Allison. Valera Tx; Estados UnidosFil: Beigi, Richard H.. University of Pittsburgh; Estados UnidosFil: Durbin, Anna P.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Karron, Ruth A.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Kass, Nancy E.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Luna, Florencia. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales. Sede Académica Argentina Buenos Aires; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Palacios, Ricardo. Governo do Estado de Sao Paulo. Secretaria da Saude. Instituto Butantan; BrasilFil: Precioso, Alexander Roberto. Governo do Estado de Sao Paulo. Secretaria da Saude. Instituto Butantan; BrasilFil: Saenz, Carla. Pan American Health Organization; Estados UnidosFil: Sheffield, Jeanne S.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Thomé, Beatriz. Governo do Estado de Sao Paulo. Secretaria da Saude. Instituto Butantan; Brasi