Inclusion of Marginalized Groups and Communities in Global Health Research Priority-Setting

Explore the practice and barriers of collaborative health policy and system research-priority setting exercise in Ethiopia

INTRODUCTION

Collaboration is gaining prominence in the priority setting of Health Policy And System Research (HPSR). However, its practice and challenges are not well explored in Ethiopia. Understanding the practice and barriers of collaborative Health Policy and System Research will help design approaches and platforms for setting inclusive and participatory policy and system-level health research topics. This paper explores the practice and barriers of collaborative HPSR-priority setting exercise in Ethiopia.

METHODS

This study investigates the practice and barriers of collaborative health policy and system research priority-setting exercises in Ethiopia. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, we conducted Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and an online self-administered survey with open-ended questionnaires to capture diverse perspectives from stakeholders involved in the research priority-setting process. Through conventional content analysis, we identified key contents related to current practices, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing collaboration in health policy and system research prioritization.

RESULTS

Our findings reveal a complex landscape characterized by varying levels of stakeholder engagement, institutional capacity constraints, and competing priorities within the health research ecosystem. Despite notable efforts to foster collaboration, stakeholders identified persistent challenges such as limited resources, institutional fragmentation, and inadequate coordination mechanisms as barriers to effective priority-setting processes. The implications of our research extend beyond academic discourse, with direct relevance to health policy and system research practice in Ethiopia. By shedding light on the dynamics of collaborative priority-setting exercises, our findings offer valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking to enhance the effectiveness and inclusivity of health research prioritization processes. Addressing the identified barriers and leveraging existing strengths in the research ecosystem can contribute to more evidence-informed health policies and programs, ultimately improving health outcomes for Ethiopian populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Most institutions do not apply health policy and system research-priority setting to conduct informed decision-making. The barriers explored were weak integration, lack of knowledge, system, and platforms for the priority setting of Health Policy and System Resreach. So, it is recommended to build skills of different actors in the Health Policy and System Research-priority setting exercise and design a system and platform to integrate different stakeholders for collaborative research topics priority setting.

Universal pictures: A lithophane codex helps teenagers with blindness visualize nanoscopic systems

People with blindness have limited access to the high-resolution graphical data and imagery of science. Here, a lithophane codex is reported. Its pages display tactile and optical readouts for universal visualization of data by persons with or without eyesight. Prototype codices illustrated microscopy of butterfly chitin-from N-acetylglucosamine monomer to fibril, scale, and whole insect-and were given to high schoolers from the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired. Lithophane graphics of Fischer-Spier esterification reactions and electron micrographs of biological cells were also 3D-printed, along with x-ray structures of proteins (as millimeter-scale 3D models). Students with blindness could visualize (describe, recall, distinguish) these systems-for the first time-at the same resolution as sighted peers (average accuracy = 88%). Tactile visualization occurred alongside laboratory training, synthesis, and mentoring by chemists with blindness, resulting in increased student interest and sense of belonging in science.

Kailo: a systemic approach to addressing the social determinants of young people's mental health and wellbeing at the local level

The mental health and wellbeing of children and young people is deteriorating. It is increasingly recognised that mental health is a systemic issue, with a wide range of contributing and interacting factors. However, the vast majority of attention and resources are focused on the identification and treatment of mental health disorders, with relatively scant attention on the social determinants of mental health and wellbeing and investment in preventative approaches. Furthermore, there is little attention on how the social determinants manifest or may be influenced at the local level, impeding the design of contextually nuanced preventative approaches. This paper describes a major research and design initiative called Kailo that aims to support the design and implementation of local and contextually nuanced preventative strategies to improve children's and young people's mental health and wellbeing. The Kailo Framework involves structured engagement with a wide range of local partners and stakeholders - including young people, community partners, practitioners and local system leaders - to better understand local systemic influences and support programmes of youth-centred and evidence-informed co-design, prototyping and testing. It is hypothesised that integrating different sources of knowledge, experience, insight and evidence will result in better embedded, more sustainable and more impactful strategies that address the social determinants of young people's mental health and wellbeing at the local level.

How should communities be meaningfully engaged (if at all) when setting priorities for biomedical research? Perspectives from the biomedical research community

BACKGROUND

There is now rising consensus that community engagement is ethically and scientifically essential for all types of health research. Yet debate continues about the moral aims, methods and appropriate timing in the research cycle for community engagement to occur, and whether the answer should vary between different types of health research. Co-design and collaborative partnership approaches that involve engagement during priority-setting, for example, are common in many forms of applied health research but are not regular practice in biomedical research. In this study, we empirically examine the normative question: should communities be engaged when setting priorities for biomedical research projects, and, if so, how and for what purpose?

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 31 members of the biomedical research community from the UK, Australia, and African countries who had engaged communities in their work. Interview data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Our study shows that biomedical researchers and community engagement experts strongly support engagement in biomedical research priority-setting, except under certain circumstances where it may be harmful to communities. However, they gave two distinct responses on what ethical purpose it should serve-either empowerment or instrumental goals-and their perspectives on how it should achieve those goals also varied. Three engagement approaches were suggested: community-initiated, synergistic, and consultative. Pre-engagement essentials and barriers to meaningful engagement in biomedical research priority-setting are also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers initial evidence that meaningful engagement in priority-setting should potentially be defined slightly differently for biomedical research relative to certain types of applied health research and that engagement practice in biomedical research should not be dominated by instrumental goals and approaches, as is presently the case.

Voices of women in homelessness during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic: a co-created qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Women in homelessness face extreme health- and social inequities. It could be postulated that during societal crises, they become even more vulnerable. Thus, the aim was to explore experiences related to the COVID-19 pandemic among women in homelessness.

METHODS

Ten interviews were conducted with women in homelessness, in Stockholm, Sweden, using researcher-driven photo elicitation. The data analysis was guided by the DEPICT model for collaborative data analysis and a qualitative content analysis was performed. A collaborative reference group of women with lived experience of homelessness contributed to the research process through designing the data collection, performing the data analysis, and providing feedback during report writing.

RESULTS

For women in homelessness, the COVID-19 pandemic was adding insult to injury, as it significantly affected everyday life and permeated most aspects of existence, leading to diminished interactions with others and reduced societal support. Thus, in an already dire situation, the virus amplified health- and social issues to another level. The women strived to find their balance on the shifting sands of guidelines and restrictions due to the pandemic. Adhering to the new social distancing rules and guidelines in line with the rest of society, was simply impossible when experiencing homelessness. However, for some women the pandemic was nothing but a storm in a teacup. The harsh reality continued irrespectively, living one day at a time and prioritizing provision for basic human needs.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic and homelessness can be viewed as two intersecting crises. However, the women's aggregated experiences were greater than the sum of experiencing homelessness and meeting the threat of the virus. Gender, exposure to violence, poverty, social isolation, and substance use were additional factors that further marginalized the women during the pandemic. To rebuild a better and more sustainable post-pandemic future for all, global commitment to ending homelessness is crucial. In addition, addressing social determinants of health must be the number one health intervention.

Needs Assessment and Best Practices for Digital Trainings for Health Professionals in Ethiopia Using the RE-AIM Framework: COVID-19, Case Study

OBJECTIVES

This study is aimed to assess the implementation science outcomes of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) e-health educational intervention in Ethiopia targeting health care workers via the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adaption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework.

METHODS

A series of three 1-hour medical seminars focused on COVID-19 prevention and treatment education were conducted between May and August 2020. Educational content was built from medical sites previously impacted by COVID-19. Post-seminar evaluation information was collected from physician and other participants by a survey instrument. Cross-sectional evaluation results are reported here by RE-AIM constructs.

RESULTS

The medical seminars reached 324 participants. Key success metrics include that 90% reporting the information delivered in a culturally sensitive/tailored manner (effectiveness), 80% reporting that they planned to share the information presented with someone else (adoption and implementation), and 64% reporting using information presented in their daily clinical responsibilities 6 months after the first medical seminars (maintenance).

CONCLUSION

Grounded in a theoretical framework and following evidence-based best practices, this intervention advances the field of dissemination and implementation science by demonstrating how to transition health care training and delivery from an in-person to digital medium in low-resource settings like Ethiopia.

Photovoicing Empowerment and Social Change for Youth Living With HIV/AIDS in Uganda

In this article, we present new insights to the application of photovoice as a tool for empowerment of the marginalized and an antecedent for social change. Special attention is directed to the use of photovoice in raising critical consciousness of the stigmatized and marginalized youth living with HIV/AIDS as a catalyst for empowerment through both the process and content of the research. The article also expounds on the practical execution of photovoice that is not adequately elaborated in projects within resource limited settings.

Study protocol: International joint research project ‘climate change resilience of Indigenous socioecological systemsʼ (RISE)

Background

Anthropogenic changes in the environment are increasingly threatening the sustainability of socioecological systems on a global scale. As stewards of the natural capital of over a quarter of the world’s surface area, Indigenous Peoples (IPs), are at the frontline of these changes. Indigenous socioecological systems (ISES) are particularly exposed and sensitive to exogenous changes because of the intimate bounds of IPs with nature. Traditional food systems (TFS) represent one of the most prominent components of ISES, providing not only diverse and nutritious food but also critical socioeconomic, cultural, and spiritual assets. However, a proper understanding of how future climate change may compromise TFS through alterations of related human-nature interactions is still lacking. Climate change resilience of indigenous socioecological systems (RISE) is a new joint international project that aims to fill this gap in knowledge.

Methods and design

RISE will use a comparative case study approach coupling on-site socioeconomic, nutritional, and ecological surveys of the target ISES of Sakha (Republic of Sakha, Russian Federation) and Karen (Kanchanaburi, Thailand) people with statistical models projecting future changes in the distribution and composition of traditional food species under contrasting climate change scenarios. The results presented as alternative narratives of future climate change impacts on TFS will be integrated into a risk assessment framework to explore potential vulnerabilities of ISES operating through altered TFS, and possible adaptation options through stakeholder consultation so that lessons learned can be applied in practice.

Discussion

By undertaking a comprehensive analysis of the socioeconomic and nutritional contributions of TFS toward the sustainability of ISES and projecting future changes under alternative climate change scenarios, RISE is strategically designed to deliver novel and robust science that will contribute towards the integration of Indigenous issues within climate change and sustainable agendas while generating a forum for discussion among Indigenous communities and relevant stakeholders. Its goal is to promote positive co-management and regional development through sustainability and climate change adaptation.

Community-based system dynamics modelling of stigmatized public health issues: Increasing diverse representation of individuals with personal experiences

Utility of community-based system dynamics (CBSD) models on stigmatized public health issues and health disparities depends upon how representative the model is to real-world experience within the community. "Personal experience" participants (PEP), especially from marginalized groups, are essential model contributors, but are often underrepresented in modeling groups due to multiple barriers. This study details a method to increase PEP representation for models on stigmatized issues. We use a case study from a CBSD project on health disparities within the association between alcohol misuse (AM) and intimate partner violence (IPV) for Northern Plains Indigenous women. Short group model building sessions were held at three community organizations providing relevant resources. Each model contributed unique system components, and there were few similarities between models. A consolidated model provided a rich picture of the complex system. Adding brief PEP-based group modeling sessions can enhance PEP representation in model development for stigmatized public health issues.

‘Safe Sport Is Not for Everyone’: Equity-Deserving Athletes’ Perspectives of, Experiences and Recommendations for Safe Sport

There is a growing concern that the voices of athletes, and in particular, athletes from equity-deserving groups, are unaccounted for in the development and advancement of Safe Sport initiatives. The lack of consideration of the needs and experiences of diverse groups is concerning, given the existing literature outside the context of sport indicating that equity-deserving individuals experience more violence. As such, the following study sought to understand how equity-deserving athletes interpret and experience Safe Sport. Grounded within an interpretive phenomenological analysis, semi-structured interviews were used to understand how athletes with marginalised identities conceptualise and experience Safe Sport. Seven participants, including two Black male athletes, two White, gay male athletes, one Middle Eastern female athlete, one White, female athlete with a physical disability and one White, non-binary, queer, athlete with a physical disability, were asked to conceptualise and describe their experiences of Safe Sport. The findings revealed these athletes perceived Safe Sport as an unrealistic and unattainable ideal that cannot fully be experienced by those from equity-deserving groups. This interpretation was reinforced by reported experiences of discriminatory comments, discriminatory behaviours and systemic barriers, perpetrated by coaches, teammates, and resulting from structural aspects of sport. The findings draw on the human rights literature to suggest integrating principles of equity, diversity and inclusion are fundamental to safeguarding equity-deserving athletes.

The Comprehensive Communal Trauma Intervention Model (CCTIM), an Innovative Transdisciplinary Population-Level Model for Treating Trauma-Induced Illness and Mental Health in Global Vulnerable Communities: Palestine, a Case Study

This paper explores how Western medicine may not fully understand and address post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other trauma-induced illnesses in a culturally appropriate manner in marginalized communities and offers a theoretical framework to develop comprehensive, effective, and sustainable solutions that comprehensively address and treat the trauma on both a collective and individual level. Focused on Palestinians, this paper discusses the collective trauma Palestinians experienced and how it manifests in transgenerational effects on the body and mind that may be post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or perhaps another distinct condition that is yet to be codified in the Western medical lexicon. It describes local alternatives to Western medical diagnostic tools like the "ease to disease" diagnostic scale and the sociopolitical context-in this case, the Palestinian fight for karamah, or dignity-from which such alternatives arise. Based on these findings, a novel theoretical framework, the comprehensive communal trauma intervention model (CCTIM), a truly transdisciplinary population-level model for treating mental health in vulnerable communities globally, is proposed. It articulates the need to address the root cause of collective trauma, make modifications to the healthcare system, and cultivate strategic equity-oriented and research-based partnerships.

Comparing Reproductive Health Awareness, Nutrition, and Hygiene among Early and Late Adolescents from Marginalized Populations of India: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Survey

Adolescence (10–19 years) is marked by many physiological changes and is vulnerable to health and nutritional problems. Adolescence, particularly, early adolescence is inadequately addressed in our national surveys. The present study aimed to assess the reproductive health awareness, nutrition, and hygiene of marginalized adolescent girls and boys and compare them among early and late adolescents. Our cross-sectional study was a part of a community-based project across India’s five zones, namely North, East, West, Central, and South. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression was performed to compare awareness about HIV/AIDS, or Sexually Transmitted Infections (STI), consumption of Iron Folic Acid (IFA) tablets and three meals in a day, safe menstrual hygiene practices, history of anemia, and open defecation practice among early and late adolescents. Data were reported as unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Among early adolescents, around 58% of girls and boys did not consume IFA tablets, and 28% of girls and 24% of boys defecated in the open. Compared to late adolescents, early adolescent girls had lower odds of awareness about HIV/AIDS (aOR (95% CI): 0.50 (0.47–0.54)) and open defecation (aOR (95% CI): 0.90 (0.83–0.98)) and higher odds of hand hygiene after defecation (aOR (95% CI): 1.52 (1.37–1.68)) and safe menstrual practices (aOR (95% CI): 1.42 (1.23–1.64)). There is a dire need to start public health interventions from early adolescence for long-term benefits throughout adolescence.

Research for Health Justice: an ethical framework linking global health research to health equity

Global health research should generate new knowledge to improve the health and well-being of those considered disadvantaged and marginalised. This goal motivates much of the global health research being undertaken today. Yet simply funding and conducting global health research will not necessarily generate the knowledge needed to help reduce health disparities between and within countries. Global health research grants programmes and projects must be structured in a particular way to generate that type of information. But how exactly should they be designed to do so? Through a programme of ethics research starting in 2009, an ethical framework called Research for Health Justice was developed that provides guidance to global health researchers and funders on how to design research projects and grants programmes to promote global health equity. It provides guidance on, for example, what research populations and questions ought to be selected, what research capacity strengthening ought to be performed and what post-study benefits ought to be provided. This paper describes how the ‘research for health justice’ framework was generated and pulls together a body of work spanning the last decade to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date version of its guidance.

Sharing power in global health research: an ethical toolkit for designing priority-setting processes that meaningfully include communities

To promote social justice and equity, global health research should meaningfully engage communities throughout projects: from setting agendas onwards. But communities, especially those that are considered disadvantaged or marginalised, rarely have a say in the priorities of the research projects that aim to help them. So far, there remains limited ethical guidance and resources on how to share power with communities in health research priority-setting. This paper presents an "ethical toolkit" for academic researchers and their community partners to use to design priority-setting processes that meaningfully include the communities impacted by their projects. An empirical reflective equilibrium approach was employed to develop the toolkit. Conceptual work articulated ethical considerations related to sharing power in g0l0o0bal health research priority-setting, developed guidance on how to address them, and created an initial version of the toolkit. Empirical work (51 in-depth interviews, 1 focus group, 2 case studies in India and the Philippines) conducted in 2018 and 2019 then tested those findings against information from global health research practice. The final ethical toolkit is a reflective project planning aid. It consists of 4 worksheets (Worksheet 1- Selecting Partners; Worksheet 2- Deciding to Partner; Worksheet 3- Deciding to Engage with the Wider Community; Worksheet 4- Designing Priority-setting) and a Companion Document detailing how to use them. Reflecting on and discussing the questions in Worksheets 1 to 4 before priority-setting will help deliver priority-setting processes that share power with communities and projects with research topics and questions that more accurately reflect their healthcare and system needs.

What are Important Ways of Sharing Power in Health Research Priority Setting? Perspectives From People With Lived Experience and Members of the Public

Community engagement (patient and public involvement) is gaining prominence in health research worldwide. But there remains limited ethical guidance on how to share power with communities in health research priority setting, particularly that which has been informed by the perspectives of those being engaged. This article provides initial evidence about what they think are important ways to share power when setting health research projects' topics and questions. Twenty-two people with lived experience, engagement practitioners, and members of the public who have been engaged in health research in the United Kingdom and Australia were interviewed. Thematic analysis identified 15 key ways to share power, many of which are relational. This study further demonstrates that tensions exist between certain ways of sharing power in health research priority setting. More research is needed to determine how to navigate those tensions.

The critical intersection of environmental and social justice: a commentary

The global crises of ecological degradation and social injustice are mutually reinforcing products of the same flawed systems. Dominant human culture is morally obliged to challenge and reconstruct these systems in order to mitigate future planetary harm. In this commentary, we argue that doing so requires a critical examination of the values and narratives which underlie systems of oppression and power. We argue for the moral necessity of a socially just approach to the ecological crisis.

Perceptions of 'Precision' and 'Personalised' Medicine in Singapore and Associated Ethical Issues

Governments are investing in precision medicine (PM) with the aim of improving healthcare through the use of genomic analyses and data analytics to develop tailored treatment approaches for individual patients. The success of PM is contingent upon clear public communications that engender trust and secure the social licence to collect and share large population-wide data sets because specific consent for each data re-use is impractical. Variation in the terminology used by different programmes used to describe PM may hinder clear communication and threaten trust. Language is used to create common understanding and expectations regarding precision medicine between researchers, clinicians and the volunteers. There is a need to better understand public interpretations of PM-related terminology. This paper reports on a qualitative study involving 24 focus group participants in the multi-lingual context of Singapore. The study explored how Singaporeans interpret and understand the terms ‘precision medicine’ and ‘personalised medicine’, and which term they felt more aptly communicates the concept and goals of PM. Results suggest that participants were unable to readily link the terms with this area of medicine and initially displayed preferences for the more familiar term of ‘personalised’. The use of visual aids to convey key concepts resonated with participants, some of whom then indicated preferences for the term ‘precision’ as being a more accurate description of PM research. These aids helped to facilitate dialogue around the ethical and social value, as well as the risks, of PM. Implications for programme developers and policy makers are discussed.

The Case for Why Africa Should Host COVID-19 Candidate Vaccine Trials

In response to provocative comments by 2 European clinicians and scientists, the World Health Organization Director General has declared that Africa will not host COVID-19 vaccine trials. Such a stance risks stigmatizing COVID-19 vaccine trials in Africa and depriving Africa of critical research. To the contrary, there is a critical need for Africa to host COVID-19 vaccine trials on public health, scientific, and ethics grounds.

Developing a toolkit for engagement practice: sharing power with communities in priority-setting for global health research projects

Background

Communities’ engagement in priority-setting is a key means for setting research topics and questions of relevance and benefit to them. However, without attention to dynamics of power and diversity, their engagement can be tokenistic. So far, there remains limited ethical guidance on how to share power with communities, particularly those considered disadvantaged and marginalised, in global health research priority-setting. This paper generates a comprehensive, empirically-based “ethical toolkit” to provide such guidance, further strengthening a previously proposed checklist version of the toolkit. The toolkit places community engagement and power-sharing at the heart of priority-setting for global health research projects.

Methods

A two part method was used to generate a revised toolkit. Part one was conceptual, consisting of novel analysis of empirical data (previously collected as part of the same overall project) to identify additional concepts relevant to power-sharing between researchers and communities in global health research priority-setting. Part two was empirical, seeking feedback on the initial checklist version of the toolkit in interviews with researchers, ethicists, community engagement practitioners, and community organisation staff.

Results

The conceptual process identified two additional components of engagement and six additional features that affect who defines, who participates, and who is heard in research priority-setting. New ethical considerations related to sharing power in global health research priority-setting are articulated in relation to those components and features. Interviewees provided suggestions for revising the toolkit’s content and language. The implications of these suggestions and the analytic process for the toolkit are described.

Conclusions

The resultant toolkit is a reflective project planning aid for researchers and their community partners to employ before priority-setting is undertaken for global health research projects. It consists of three worksheets (to be completed collectively) and a companion document detailing how to use them. It is more comprehensive than the initial toolkit, as worksheet questions for discussion cover all phases of priority-setting.