Health Research Policy and Systems最新文献

Background: The European Health Data Space (EHDS) regulation has been proposed to harmonize health data processing. Given its parallels with the Act on Secondary Use of Health and Social Data (Secondary Use Act) implemented in Finland in 2020, this study examines the consequences of heightened privacy constraints on registry-based medical research.

Methods: We collected study permit counts approved by university hospitals in Finland in 2014-2023 and the data authority Findata in 2020‒2023. The changes in the study permit counts were analysed before and after the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Secondary Use Act. By fitting a linear regression model, we estimated the deficit in study counts following the Secondary Use Act.

Results: Between 2020 and 2023, a median of 5.5% fewer data permits were approved annually by Finnish university hospitals. On the basis of linear regression modelling, we estimated a reduction of 46.9% in new data permits nationally in 2023 compared with the expected count. Similar changes were neither observed after the implementation of the GDPR nor in permit counts of other medical research types, confirming that the deficit was caused by the Secondary Use Act.

Conclusions: This study highlights concerns related to data privacy laws for registry-based medical research and future patient care.

Background: In light of the multi-faceted challenges confronting health systems worldwide and the imperative to advance towards development goals, the contribution of health policy graduates is of paramount importance, facilitating the attainment of health and well-being objectives. This paper delineates a set of core skills and competencies that are requisite for health policy graduates, with the objective of preparing these graduates for a spectrum of future roles, including both academic and non-academic positions.

Methods: The study was conducted in three phases: a scoping review, qualitative interviews and the validation of identified competencies through brainstorming with experts. In the initial phase, a scoping review was conducted on the databases. The following databases were searched: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar search engine. Additionally, the WebPages of universities offering health policy programmes were manually searched. In the second phase, 36 semi-structured interviews were conducted with students, graduates and distinguished academics from Iran and other countries. These interviews were conducted in person or via email. In the third phase, the draft version of the competencies and their associated learning objectives, derived from the preceding stages, was subjected to independent review by an expert panel and subsequently discussed. In light of the expert panel's findings, the authors undertook a subsequent revision of the list, leading to the finalization of the core competencies through a process of consensus.

Results: In the scoping review phase, the analysis included six studies and nine university curricula. The results of the scoping review could be classified into five domains: health system understanding, health policy research, knowledge translation, multidisciplinary work and knowledge of public health. In the second phase, six core competencies were extracted from the interviews and combined with the results of the first phase, which were then discussed by the expert panel at the third phase. The final five core competencies, derived from the brainstorming session and presented in no particular order, encompass health policy research, policy analysis, educational competencies, decision-making and multidisciplinary work.

Conclusions: It is essential that the curriculum is appropriate and contextually tailored, as this is crucial to foster multi-dimensional competencies that complement the specific disciplines of future health policy scholars. These scholars must possess the ability to genuinely serve their health systems towards achieving health-system goals and sustainable development.

Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) by 2030 relies on the delivery of quality healthcare services through effective primary healthcare (PHC) systems. This necessitates robust infrastructure, adequately skilled health workers and the availability of essential medicines and commodities. Despite the critical role of minimum standards in benchmarking PHC quality, no global consensus on these standards exists. Nigeria has established minimum standards to enhance healthcare accessibility and quality, including the Revised Ward Health System Strategy (RWHSS) by the National Primary Health Care Development Agency (NPHCDA). This paper outlines the evolution of PHC minimum standards in Nigeria, evaluates compliance with RWHSS standards across all public PHC facilities, and examines the implications for ongoing PHC revitalization efforts. The study used a cross-sectional descriptive design to assess compliance across 25 736 public PHC facilities in Nigeria. Data collection involved a national survey using a standardized assessment tool focussing on infrastructure, staffing, essential medicines and service delivery. Compliance with RWHSS minimum standards was found to be below 50% across all facilities, with median compliance scores of 40.7%. Outreach posts had a median compliance of 32.6%, level 1 facilities 31.5% and level 2+ facilities 50.9%. Key findings revealed major gaps in health infrastructure, human resources and availability of essential medicines and equipment. Compliance varied regionally, with the North-west showing the highest number of facilities but varied performance across standards. The lessons learned underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions and resource allocation to address the identified deficiencies. This study highlights the critical need for regular, comprehensive compliance assessments to guide policy-makers in identifying gaps and strengthening PHC systems in Nigeria. Recommendations include enhancing monitoring mechanisms, improving resource distribution and focussing on infrastructure and human resource development to meet UHC and SDG targets. Addressing these gaps is essential for advancing Nigeria's healthcare system and ensuring equitable, quality care for all.

Objective: This study aims to analyse the content of internet medical policies, grasp the inherent laws of the development of internet medical policies and provide references for improving the policy system.

Methods: On the basis of web crawler technology, 436 internet medical policies issued by the central and local governments after the Healthy China Strategy was proposed were collected. The BERTopic model was used to extract topics, and a comprehensive analysis of China's internet medical policy texts was conducted through the analysis of topic content, topic hierarchy and topic clusters.

Results: A total of 27 topics were identified in China's internet medical policies, mainly focussing on five topic clusters: medical service regulation, elderly nursing and children's healthcare using traditional Chinese medicine, user safety guarantees, health education and communication and infectious disease treatment and recovery guidance.

Conclusions: Different topic contents play a role in promoting the comprehensive and standardized development of internet medical services. However, there is still room for further improvement in policy integrity, consideration of multiple types of users, and implementation effectiveness. Continuous efforts are needed to optimize the effectiveness of policies.

Background: When clinically effective, cost-effective health interventions are not fully implemented in clinical practice, population health suffers. Economic factors are among the most commonly cited reasons for suboptimal implementation. Despite this, implementation and economic evaluation are not routinely performed in conjunction with one another. This review sought to identify and describe what methods are available for researchers to incorporate implementation within economic evaluation, how these methods differ, when they should be used, and where gaps remain.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review using systematic methods. A pearl-growing approach was used to identify studies. References and citations were identified using Web of Science and Scopus. We included for review any study that contained terms relating to economic evaluation and a series of implementation-related terms in the title or abstract. The search was conducted and validated using two independent researchers.

Results: Our review identified 42 unique studies that included a methodology for combining implementation and economic evaluation. The methods identified could be categorized into four broad themes: (i) policy cost-effectiveness approach (11 studies), (ii) value of information and value of implementation approach (16 studies), (iii) mixed methods approach (6 studies), and (iv) costing approach (9 studies). We identified a trend over time from methods that adopted the policy cost-effectiveness approach to methods that considered the trade-off between the value of information and value of implementation. More recently, mixed methods approaches to incorporate economic evaluation and implementation have been developed, alongside methods to define, measure and cost individual components of the implementation process for use in economic evaluation.

Conclusion: Our review identified a range of methods currently available for researchers considering implementation alongside economic evaluation. There is no single method or tool that can incorporate all the relevant issues to fully incorporate implementation within an economic evaluation. Instead, there are a suite of tools available, each of which can be used to answer a specific question relating to implementation. Researchers, reimbursement agencies and national and local decision-makers need to consider how best to utilize these tools to improve implementation.

The current research ethics review systems are composed of isolated institutional Research Ethics Committees (RECs) that develop their own standard operating procedures (SOPs), templates and so on, with low adoption of digital solutions to manage submission and review processes. This poses several challenges, such as delays, higher costs, and hindering multi-site research. We propose an online national research ethics platform that all RECs can use, with common review processes and documentation requirements following national policy. The system will scale up adoption of digital solutions to all RECs. It will reduce administrative burden and harmonize review procedures. It will also obviate the need for separate and isolated interventions such as national REC registries or clinical trial registries, as these can be generated as transactional outputs of the system. The harmonized procedures and possibility of single submission will facilitate multi-site research. Sharing of resources and expertise among RECs on the platform will enhance resilience. An e-EC system developed in India and a Regional Health research portal developed by the WHO South-East Asia office offer proof of concepts to demonstrate the feasibility of developing and using such systems. The proposed solution is ambitious but feasible. Developing the proposed system will be a vital cost-effective investment in national health infrastructure to strengthen the research ecosystem and accelerate delivery of improved healthcare innovations by reducing unnecessary delays in conducting research. To maximize benefits, concurrent efforts are needed to build researchers' capacity and enhance the quality and efficiency of human reviews of the research proposals by REC.