BMJ Global Health最新文献

Introduction: Reviewing and updating research priorities is essential to assess progress and to ensure optimal allocation of financial and human resources in research. In 2001, WHO held a research priority setting workshop for herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) research in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to describe progress between 2000 and 2020 in three of the five key research priority areas outlined in the workshop: HSV-2/HIV interactions, HSV-2 control measures and HSV-2 mathematical modelling. The remaining priorities are addressed in a companion paper.

Method: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health and Cochrane databases was carried out. Relevant primary research studies based in LMICs, written in English and published on 2000-2020 were included. Papers were screened by two independent reviewers, and suitable variables were selected for manual extraction from study texts. Data were organised into an Excel spreadsheet and analysed using IBM SPSS.

Results: In total, 3214 discrete papers were identified, of which 180 were eligible for inclusion (HSV-2/HIV interactions, 98; control measures, 58; mathematical modelling, 24). Most studies were conducted in East Africa. The majority of the 2001 WHO HSV-2 research priorities were addressed at least in part. Overall, despite several studies describing a strong relationship between HSV-2 and the acquisition and transmission of HIV, HSV-2 control repeatedly demonstrated little effect on HIV shedding or transmission. Further, although mathematical modelling predicted that vaccines could significantly impact HSV-2 indicators, HSV-2 vaccine studies were few. Studies of antiviral resistance were also few.

Conclusion: Since 2000, LMIC HSV-2 research addressing its control, HIV interactions and mathematical modelling has largely addressed the priorities set in the 2001 WHO HSV-2 workshop. However, key knowledge gaps remain in vaccine research, antiviral cost-effectiveness, antiviral resistance and specific geographical areas.

Institutional capacity for doctoral training is key to addressing the complex challenges facing the global south. In the context of the need for skilled knowledge workers in health systems and growing demand for doctoral places, we reflect on the evolution of a public health doctoral programme in a South African School of Public Health. Through this case, we aim to contribute to wider debates on the form and content of emerging public health doctoral programmes in South Africa and the African continent. Drawing on a multi-level framework of 'curriculum responsiveness' we consider responsive public health doctoral education as simultaneously engaging macro-social, institutional/cultural, disciplinary and individual learning imperatives. We assess the responsiveness of the doctoral programme against these elements, describing the growth, institutional context and systems and pedagogical strategies introduced over the last decade, and areas for further development. We conclude by proposing the multi-level capacities required for responsive public health doctoral education. We highlight the need for diversified curricula (including professional doctorates) that support a wider set of graduate attributes and career trajectories beyond academia, greater investment in doctoral infrastructures within higher education institutions, and disciplinary practices and pedagogies that centre epistemic access and justice.

Introduction: Equitable inclusion of low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) researchers and women in research authorship is a priority. A review of progress in addressing WHO-identified priorities provided an opportunity to examine the geographical and gender distribution of authorship in herpes simplex virus type-2 (HSV-2) research.

Methods: Publications addressing five areas prioritised in a WHO workshop and published between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Data on author country, gender, authorship position and research funding source were collected by manuscript review and internet searches and analysed using IBM SPSS V.26.

Results: Of, 297 eligible papers identified, (n=294) had multiple authors. Of these, 241 (82%) included at least one LMIC author and 143 (49%) and 122 (41%) had LMIC first and last authors, respectively. LMICs funded studies were more than twice as likely to include an LMIC first or last author as high-income country-funded studies (relative risk 2.36, 95% CI 1.93 to 2.89). Respectively, 129 (46%) and 106 (36%) studies had female first and last authors. LMIC first and last authorship varied widely by HSV-2 research area and increased over time to 65% and 59% by 2015-2020.

Conclusion: Despite location of the research itself in LMIC settings, over the 20-year period, LMIC researchers held only a minority of first and last authorship positions. While LMIC representation in these positions improved over time, important inequities remain in key research areas and for women. Addressing current and historical power disparities in global health research, research infrastructure and how it is funded may be key addressing to addressing these issues.

Background: Co-creation is seen as a way to ensure all relevant needs and perspectives are included and to increase its potential for beneficial effects and uptake process evaluation is crucial. However, existing process evaluation frameworks have been built on practices characterised by top-down developed and implemented interventions and may be limited in capturing essential elements of co-creation. This study aims to provide a review of studies planning and/or conducting a process evaluation of public health interventions adopting a co-creation approach and aims to derive assessed process evaluation components, used frameworks and insights into formative and/or participatory evaluation.

Methods: We searched for studies on Scopus and the Health CASCADE Co-Creation Database. Co-authors performed a concept-mapping exercise to create a set of overarching dimensions for clustering the identified process evaluation components.

Results: 54 studies were included. Conceptualisation of process evaluation included in studies concerned intervention implementation, outcome evaluation, mechanisms of impact, context and the co-creation process. 22 studies (40%) referenced ten existing process evaluation or evaluation frameworks and most referenced were the frameworks developed by Moore et al (14%), Saunders et al (5%), Steckler and Linnan (5%) and Nielsen and Randall (5%).38 process evaluation components were identified, with a focus on participation (48%), context (40%), the experience of co-creators (29%), impact (29%), satisfaction (25%) and fidelity (24%).13 studies (24%) conducted formative evaluation, 37 (68%) conducted summative evaluation and 2 studies (3%) conducted participatory evaluation.

Conclusion: The broad spectrum of process evaluation components addressed in co-creation studies, covering both the evaluation of the co-creation process and the intervention implementation, highlights the need for a process evaluation tailored to co-creation studies. This work provides an overview of process evaluation components, clustered in dimensions and reflections which researchers and practitioners can use to plan a process evaluation of a co-creation process and intervention.

Introduction: Low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) have a high burden of herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) infection, which has been strongly associated with HIV. In 2001, the WHO hosted a workshop to set research priorities for HSV-2 in LMICs. Periodic re-evaluation of research priorities is essential to ensure effective allocation of resources. This study describes the progress made between 2000 and 2020 in addressing the priorities identified in two of the five thematic areas that were the workshop's focus: HSV-2 epidemiology and diagnostics. The remaining areas are addressed in a companion paper.

Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health and Cochrane databases was carried out. Relevant primary and secondary research studies conducted in LMICs, written in English and published from 2000-2020 were included. Two independent researchers screened, identified papers and extracted preidentified variables from study texts. Data were organised into an Excel spreadsheet and analysed using IBM SPSS V.26.

Results: Overall, 4445 discrete papers were identified, of which 165 publications were eligible for inclusion. The highest general population HSV-2 prevalence was reported in South and West Africa. Prevalence was higher among women than men and increased with age. HSV-2 prevalence studies among key populations were few, and the majority were in East and South Asia. Cohort studies of HSV-2 incidence among younger populations (mean age=25 years) and HSV-2 infection prevalence in North Africa and the Middle East were few. The most researched topic in HSV-2 diagnostics addressed serological techniques and direct molecular biology. Studies of point-of-care testing were also few.

Conclusion: HSV-2 research identified in LMICs has mainly addressed the epidemiology and diagnostics priorities identified by the 2001 WHO workshop. Unaddressed priorities include point-of-care testing, antiviral resistance and exploration of HSV-2 epidemiology in neglected geographical settings and population subgroups.

Rationale: A small number of earlier studies have suggested an effect of temporary abstinence campaigns on alcohol consumption. However, all were based on self-reported consumption estimates.

Objectives: Using a time series of 23-year monthly alcohol sales data, this study examined the effect of an annual temporary abstinence campaign, which has been organised annually since 2003 during the Buddhist Lent period (spanning 3 months), on population-level alcohol consumption.

Methods: Data used in the analysis included a time series of monthly alcohol sales data from January 1995 to September 2017 and the midyear population counts for those years. Generalised additive models (GAM) were applied to estimate trends as smooth functions of time, while identifying a relationship between the Buddhist Lent abstinence campaigns on alcohol consumption. The sensitivity analysis was performed using a seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average with exogenous variables (SARIMAX) model.

Intervention: The Buddhist Lent abstinence campaign is a national mass media campaign combined with community-based activities that encourages alcohol abstinence during the Buddhist Lent period, spanning 3 months and varying between July and October depending on the lunar calendar. The campaign has been organised annually since 2003.

Main outcome: Per capita alcohol consumption using monthly alcohol sales data divided by the midyear total population number used as a proxy.

Results: Median monthly per capita consumption was 0.43 (IQR: 0.37 to 0.51) litres of pure alcohol. Over the study period, two peaks of alcohol consumption were in March and December of each year. The significant difference between before-campaign and after-campaign coefficients in the GAM, -0.102 (95% CI: -0.163 to -0.042), indicated an effect of the campaign on alcohol consumption after adjusting for the time trend and monthly seasonality, corresponding to an average reduction of 9.97% (95% CI: 3.65% to 24.18%). The sensitivity analyses produced similar results, where the campaign was associated with a decrease in consumption of 8.1% (95% CI: 0.4% to 15.7%).

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the temporary abstinence campaign was associated with a decrease in population-level alcohol consumption during campaign periods. The finding contributed to a growing body of evidence on the effectiveness of emerging temporary abstinence campaigns.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in extreme strain on health systems including the health workforce, essential health services and vaccination coverage. We examined disruptions to immunisation and maternal and child health (MCH) services, concerns of personal well-being and delivery of healthcare during the pandemic as well as factors associated with self-reported trauma or burnout among healthcare providers (HCPs).

Methods: In March-April 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among HCPs in two provinces of Indonesia. HCPs involved in COVID-19 or routine immunisation and MCH services were randomly selected from district/city health office registration lists. We descriptively analysed service disruptions experienced by HCPs as well as trauma, burnout and concerns of personal well-being and delivery of healthcare during the pandemic. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were undertaken to identify factors associated with trauma or burnout.

Results: We recruited 604 HCPs. Mobilisation of staff from routine health services to COVID-19 response duties was a key reason for service disruptions (87.9%). Strategies such as community outreach and task shifting were implemented to overcome disruptions. Trauma or burnout during the pandemic was reported by 64.1% HCPs, with 23.5% reporting worse mental or emotional health.Factors associated with trauma or burnout included delivery of COVID-19 immunisation (adjusted OR (aOR) 2.54, 95% CI 1.08 to 5.94); and delivery of both COVID-19 immunisation and routine immunisation compared with no involvement in vaccination programmes (aOR 2.42, 95% CI 1.06 to 5.52); poor treatment in the workplace (aOR 2.26, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.38) and lower confidence to respond to patient queries on COVID-19 immunisation (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.22).

Conclusion: HCPs experienced service disruptions, trauma and burnout and implemented strategies to minimise disruptions to service delivery and improve patient experiences. Our study highlights the need to ensure that workforce resilience and strategies to protect and support HCPs are considered for pandemic planning, preparedness and management.