Pushing the envelope through the Global Financing Facility: potential impact of mobilising additional support to scale-up life-saving interventions for women, children and adolescents in 50 high-burden countries

Global newborn health research priorities identified in 2014: A review to evaluate the uptake

BACKGROUND

In 2014, World Health Organization published global research priorities for newborn health till 2025. We conducted this review to summarize completed or ongoing research on the twenty priorities.

METHODS

We conducted searches for twenty questions on MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and funder websites between July 2014 and May 2022. Studies addressing research questions using adequate design were included. Adequacy of uptake of a priority was assessed based on predefined criteria.

FINDINGS

The uptake of research priorities was high for 8 (40%), moderate for 11 (55%), and one priority, effectiveness of training community health workers (CHWs) to treat neonatal sepsis at home remains unaddressed. Priorities with moderate uptake include effectiveness of simplified neonatal resuscitation programme, simple clinical algorithms for CHWs to neonatal infection, CHWs training in basic neonatal resuscitation, community-initiated kangaroo mother care, perinatal audits, and novel tocolytic agents, scaling-up chlorhexidine cord application, stable surfactant with simpler administration, accurate, affordable methods to diagnose fetal distress, strategies for prevention and treatment of intrauterine growth retardation, and causal pathways for antenatal stillbirths.

INTERPRETATION

Adequate research was undertaken on pressing global concerns in newborn health. Funders and researchers should reflect on and address less researched areas.

FUNDING

None.

Are rhetorical commitments to adolescents reflected in planning documents? An exploratory content analysis of adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Global Financing Facility country plans

BACKGROUND

The Global Financing Facility (GFF) offers an opportunity to close the financing gap that holds back gains in women, children's and adolescent health. However, very little work exists examining GFF practice, particularly for adolescent health. As momentum builds for the GFF, we examine initial GFF planning documents to inform future national and multi-lateral efforts to advance adolescent sexual and reproductive health.

METHODS

We undertook a content analysis of the first 11 GFF Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents available on the GFF website. The countries involved include Bangladesh, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kenya, Liberia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda.

RESULTS

While several country documents signal understanding and investment in adolescents as a strategic area, this is not consistent across all countries, nor between Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents. In both types of documents commitments weaken as one moves from programming content to indicators to investment. Important contributions include how teenage pregnancy is a universal concern, how adolescent and youth friendly health services and school-based programs are supported in several country documents, how gender is noted as a key social determinant critical for mainstreaming across the health system, alongside the importance of multi-sectoral collaboration, and the acknowledgement of adolescent rights. Weaknesses include the lack of comprehensive analysis of adolescent health needs, inconsistent investments in adolescent friendly health services and school based programs, missed opportunities in not supporting multi-component and multi-level initiatives to change gender norms involving adolescent boys in addition to adolescent girls, and neglect of governance approaches to broker effective multi-sectoral collaboration, community engagement and adolescent involvement.

CONCLUSION

There are important examples of how the GFF supports adolescents and their sexual and reproductive health. However, more can be done. While building on service delivery approaches more consistently, it must also fund initiatives that address the main social and systems drivers of adolescent health. This requires capacity building for the technical aspects of adolescent health, but also engaging politically to ensure that the right actors are convened to prioritize adolescent health in country plans and to ensure accountability in the GFF process itself.

How do decision-makers use evidence in community health policy and financing decisions? A qualitative study and conceptual framework in four African countries

Various investments could help countries deliver on the universal health coverage (UHC) goals set by the global community; community health is a pillar of many national strategies towards UHC. Yet despite resource mobilization towards this end, little is known about the potential costs and value of these investments, as well as how evidence on the same would be used in related decisions. This qualitative study was conducted to understand the use of evidence in policy and financing decisions for large-scale community health programmes in low- and middle-income countries. Through key informant interviews with 43 respondents in countries with community health embedded in national UHC strategies (Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique) and at global institutions, we investigated evidence use in community health financing and policy decision-making, as well as evidentiary needs related to community health data for decision-making. We found that evidence use is limited at all levels, in part due to a perceived lack of high-quality, relevant evidence. This perception stems from two main areas: first, desire for local evidence that reflects the context, and second, much existing economic evidence does not deal with what decision-makers value when it comes to community health systems-i.e. coverage and (to a lesser extent) quality. Beyond the evidence gap, there is limited capacity to assess and use the evidence. Elected officials also face political challenges to disinvestment as well as structural obstacles to evidence use, including the outsized influence of donor priorities. Evaluation data must to speak to decision-maker interests and constraints more directly, alongside financiers of community health providing explicit guidance and support on the role of evidence use in decision-making, empowering national decision-makers. Improved data quality, increased relevance of evidence and capacity for evidence use can drive improved efficiency of financing and evidence-based policymaking.

On the Path to UHC - Global Evidence Must Go Local to Be Useful Comment on "Disease Control Priorities Third Edition Is Published: A Theory of Change Is Needed for Translating Evidence to Health Policy"

The Disease Control Priorities (DCP) publications have pioneered new ways of thinking about investing in health. We agree with Norheim, that a useful first step to advance efforts to translate DCP's global evidence into local health priorities, is to develop a clear Theory of Change (ToC). However, a ToC that aims to define how global evidence (DCP and others) can be used to inform national policy is too narrow an undertaking. We propose efforts should be directed towards developing a ToC to define how to support progressive institutional development to deliver on universal health coverage (UHC), putting the client at the center. Enhancing efforts to meet the new global health imperatives requires a shift in focus of attention to move radically from global to local. In order to achieve this we need to reorganize the nature of technical assistance (TA) along three major lines (1) examine and act to clarify the mandates and roles to be played by multilateral normative and convening agencies, (2) ensure detailed understanding of local institutions, their needs and their demands, and (3) provide TA over time and in trust with local counterparts. This last requirement implies the need for long-term local presence as well as an international network of expertise centers, to share scarce technical capabilities as well as to learn together across country engagements. Financing will need to be reorganized to incentivize and support demand-led capacity strengthening.