Aligning in the dark: Variable and shifting (user-) settings in developing point-of-care diagnostics for tuberculosis and HIV

Equivocal diagnostics: Making a 'good' point-of-care test for elimination in global health

What is a diagnostic test for? We might assume the answer to this question is straightforward. A good test would help identify what disease someone suffers from, assist health providers to determine the correct course of treatment and/or enable public health authorities to know and intervene in health at the level of the population. In this article, we show that what a specific diagnostic test is for, the value it holds for different actors, and what makes it good, or not, is often far from settled. We tell the story of the development and design of a rapid antibody test for onchocerciasis, or river blindness, tracking multiple iterations of the device through three configurational moments in the framing of onchocerciasis disease and reshaping of the global health innovation ecosystem. Efforts to build that ecosystem for diagnostics are often premised on the notion that public health needs for diagnostics are pre-given and stable; the challenge is seen to be how to incentivize investment and find a customer base for diagnostics in under-resourced settings. By contrast, we show that for any disease, diagnostic needs are both multiple and constantly in flux, and are unlikely to be met by a single, stand-alone product. In the case of the onchocerciasis Ov-16 rapid test, the failure to recognize and address the multiplicity and instability of diagnostic needs in the innovation process resulted in the development of a rapid point of care test that might be manufactured, procured and used, but is unloved by public health experts and commercial manufacturers alike. The equivocal value of the onchocerciasis rapid test, we suggest, reveals the inadequacy of the current global health innovation ecosystem for developing diagnostic 'goods'.

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts

BACKGROUND

Qualitative social research has made valuable contributions to understanding technology-based interventions in global health. However, we have little evidence of who is carrying out this research, where, how, for what purpose, or the overall scope of this body of work. To address these questions, we undertook a systematic evidence mapping of one area of technology-focused research in global health, related to the development, deployment and use of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

We conducted an exhaustive search to identify papers reporting on primary qualitative studies that explore the development, deployment, and use of POCTs in LMICs and screened results to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included studies and descriptive analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria, with numbers increasing year by year. Funding of studies was primarily credited to high income country (HIC)-based institutions (95%) and 64% of first authors were affiliated with HIC-based institutions. Study sites, in contrast, were concentrated in a small number of LMICs. Relatively few studies examined social phenomena related to POCTs that take place in HICs. Seventy-one percent of papers reported on studies conducted within the context of a trial or intervention. Eighty percent reported on studies considering POCTs for HIV and/or malaria. Studies overwhelmingly reported on POCT use (91%) within primary-level health facilities (60%) or in hospitals (30%) and explored the perspectives of the health workforce (70%).

CONCLUSIONS

A reflexive approach to the role, status, and contribution of qualitative and social science research is crucial to identifying the contributions it can make to the production of global health knowledge and understanding the roles technology can play in achieving global health goals. The body of qualitative social research on POCTs for LMICs is highly concentrated in scope, overwhelmingly focuses on testing in the context of a narrow number of donor-supported initiatives and is driven by HIC resources and expertise. To optimise the full potential of qualitative social research requires the promotion of open and just research ecosystems that broaden the scope of inquiry beyond established public health paradigms and build social science capacity in LMICs.

Botswana tuberculosis (TB) stakeholders broadly support scaling up next-generation whole genome sequencing: Ethical and practical considerations for Botswana and global health

Global health agencies are increasingly promoting the scale-up of next-generation whole genome sequencing (NG-WGS) of pathogens into infectious disease control programs, including for tuberculosis (TB). However, little is known about how stakeholders in low-to-middle income countries (LMICs) understand the ethics, benefits, and risks of these proposals. We conducted a qualitative study in Greater Gaborone, Botswana to learn how TB stakeholders there viewed a potential scale-up of NG-WGS into Botswana's TB program. We conducted 30 interviews and four deliberative dialogues with TB stakeholders based in Greater Gaborone, the country's largest city and capital. We created and showed participants an animated video series about a fictional family that experienced TB diagnosis, treatment, contact tracing, and data uses that were informed by NG-WGS. We analyzed transcripts using reflexive thematic analysis. We found broad support for the scale-up of TB NG-WGS in Botswana, owing to perceived benefits. Support was qualified with statements about ensuring adequate planning, resource-allocation, community and stakeholder engagement, capacity-building, and assessing ethical norms around publishing data. Our results suggest that scaling up NG-WGS for TB in Botswana would be supported by stakeholders there, contingent upon the government and other entities adequately investing in the initiative. These findings are relevant to other LMICs considering scale-ups of NG-WGS and related technologies for infectious diseases and suggest the need for sustained research into the acceptability of pathogen sequencing in other contexts.

Imperfect diagnosis: The truncated legacies of Zika testing

When the Zika virus burst onto the international scene in the second half of 2015, the development of diagnostic tools was seen as an urgent global health priority. Diagnostic capacity was restricted to a small number of reference laboratories, and none of the few available molecular or serological tests had been validated for extensive use in an outbreak setting. In the early weeks of the crisis, key funders stepped in to accelerate research and development efforts, and the WHO took responsibility for steering diagnostic standardization, a role it had successfully played during the West Africa Ebola virus outbreak. Yet when the WHO declared the end of the Zika Public Health Emergency of International Concern in November 2016, diagnostic capacity remained patchy, and few tools were available at the scale required in the countries that bore the brunt of the epidemic, particularly Brazil. This article analyses the limited impact of global R&D efforts on the availability of Zika diagnostic options where they were most needed and for those most vulnerable: women who might have been exposed to the virus during their pregnancy and children born with suspected congenital Zika syndrome. The truncated legacies of testing during the Zika crisis reveal some of the fault lines in the global health enterprise, particularly the limits of 'emergency R&D' to operate in geopolitical contexts that do not conform to the ideal type of a humanitarian crisis, or to tackle technical issues that are inextricably linked to domestic struggles over the scope and distribution of biological citizenship. Diagnostic shortcomings, we argue, lie at the heart of the stunning transformation, in less than two years, in the status of Zika: from international public health emergency to neglected disease.

Aligning diagnostics to the point-of-care: lessons for innovators, evaluators and decision-makers from tuberculosis and HIV

Diagnostics, including those that work at point-of-care, are an essential part of successful public health responses to infectious diseases and pandemics. Yet, they are not always used or fit intended use settings. This paper reports on key insights from a qualitative study on how those engaged with developing and implementing new point-of-care (POC) diagnostics for tuberculosis (TB) and HIV ensure these technologies work at POC. Ethnographic fieldwork between 2015 and 2017 consisting of 53 semistructured interviews with global stakeholders and visits to workshops, companies, and conferences was combined with 15 semistructured interviews with stakeholders in India including providers, decision-makers, scientists and developers and visits to companies, clinics and laboratories. Our results show how developers and implementer of HIV and TB POC diagnostics aim to know and align their diagnostics to elements in more settings than just intended use, but also the setting of the developer, the global intermediaries, the bug/disease and the competitor. Actors and elements across these five settings define what a good diagnostic is, yet their needs might conflict or change and they are difficult to access. Aligning diagnostics to the POC requires continuous needs assessment throughout development and implementation phases as well as substantive, ongoing investment in relationships with users. The flexibility required for such continuous realigning and iteration clashes with established evaluation procedures and business models in global health and risks favouring certain products over others. The paper concludes with suggestions to strengthen this alignment work and applies this framework to research needs in the wake of COVID-19.