An umbrella review of intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health policy

Intersectoral health interventions to improve the well-being of people living with type 2 diabetes: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Intersectoral collaboration is a collaborative approach between the health sectors and other sectors to address the interdependent nature of the social determinants of health associated with chronic diseases such as diabetes. This scoping review aims to identify intersectoral health interventions implemented in primary care and community settings to improve the well-being and health of people living with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol is developed by the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework for scoping reviews and the Levac et al methodological enhancement. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, grey literature and the reference list of key studies will be searched to identify any study, published between 2000 and 2023, related to the concepts of intersectorality, diabetes and primary/community care. Two reviewers will independently screen all titles/abstracts, full-text studies and grey literature for inclusion and extract data. Eligible interventions will be classified by sector of action proposed by the Social Determinants of Health Map and the conceptual framework for people-centred and integrated health services and further sorted according to the actors involved. This work started in September 2023 and will take approximately 10 months to be completed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presentations to stakeholders.

A Public Health Approach to New York City's Mental Health Crisis

This Viewpoint shares New York City’s rationale, process, and challenges in addressing mental health, focusing on 1 of 3 pillars of the plan—overdose—as a case study to inform the work of other governments across the nation.

Assessing the governance environment for private sector engagement in health in Africa: Results from a multi-country survey

Background

The role of the private sector in health is clear in many countries but engagement can be improved. The World Health Organization (WHO) developed a global strategy in 2020 focused on engaging the private sector in health service delivery through governance in mixed health systems and detailed six governance behaviours to guide its Member States. To operationalise these global ideas into practice, the Regional Office for Africa conducted a multi-country study to understand perceptions around the six governance behaviours. This article examines the perceptions of respondents from 13 African countries on the governance environment for private sector engagement in health.

Methods

Data were collected through an online survey that was distributed to individuals from ministries of health and their partner organisations, private sector institutions and initiatives in countries and development organisations (n = 81) across 13 countries. The survey was based on the following six governance behaviours: build understanding, enable stakeholders, nurture trust, foster relations, align structures and deliver strategy.

Results

Results showed that respondents had mixed perceptions of the governance environment for private sector engagement in health in their respective countries. Although 88% of respondents (n = 63/72) were familiar with the general inclusion of the private sector in national health sector plans, 63% of respondents (n = 45/71) noted there was limited or no integration of the private sector in the health system, and further, 28% of respondents noted there was no private sector reporting in health information systems (n = 19/69). Key opportunities presented in more than one governance behaviour include: (i) increasing private sector engagement in public sector activities, (ii) establishing clear roles and responsibilities through formal partnership agreements, (iii) improving data sharing through shared health information systems, (iv) incentives and subsidies, (v) capacity building, (vi) creating norms, guidelines, and regulations and (vii) conducting joint monitoring and evaluation. Many of these outlined overlapping concepts are not exclusive to one behaviour, thus, it is evident that when targeted, there is the potential to improve numerous governance behaviours. This further reiterates the view that the governance behaviours should be understood as connected and not unrelated areas.

Conclusions

The study provides insight into the perceptions of respondents from select African countries on the governance environment for private sector engagement in health. These findings can inform the development of strategies and interventions to support and enhance private sector engagement in health in the region.

Health Equity Cannot Be Sought Without the Consideration of Racism In Equity-Focused Urban Health Initiatives

Given that racism is present worldwide, we believe it is imperative to address racism in the pursuit of health equity in cities. Despite the strengths of global urban health efforts in improving health equity, these initiatives can be furthered by explicitly considering systemic racism. Because racism is a major contributor to health issues, utilizing critical race theory (CRT) and taking an anti-racist perspective can help key players understand how racial health differences are initiated and sustained, which will subsequently inform solutions in seeking to address urban health inequities. Applying CRT within policymaking can happen in a variety of ways that are explored in this article. Ultimately, by acknowledging and responding to the effect of racism on groups within cities and the increased difficulties racialized minorities face, international players may use their power to transfer data and resources to cities that could benefit from specialized support.

Where Is Equity in HiAP? Comment on "A Realist Explanatory Case Study Investigating How Common Goals, Leadership, and Committed Staff Facilitate Health in All Policies Implementation in the Municipality of Kuopio, Finland"

Health equity is no longer a central feature of Health in All Policies (HiAP) approaches despite its presence in select definitions of HiAP. In other words, HiAP is not just about considering health, but also health equity. But as HiAP has become more mainstream, its success around health equity has been muted and largely non-existent. Given the normative underpinning and centrality of equity in HiAP, equity should be better considered in HiAP and particularly when considering what 'successful' implementation may look like. Raising health on the radar of policy-makers is not mutually exclusive from considering equity. Taking an incremental approach to considering equity in HiAP can yield positive results. This article discusses these ideas and presents potential actions to restore HiAP's once central equity objectives, which include: seeking synergies focused on health equity with those who hold different convictions, both in terms of goals and measures of success; considering the conditions that allow HiAP to be fostered, such as good governance; and drawing on research on HiAP and other multisectoral approaches.