Examining tribal health inequalities around three forested sites in India: Results of a cross-sectional survey

Response to correspondence article on the research protocol titled Towards Health Equity and Transformative Action on tribal health (THETA) studyto describe, explain and act on tribal health inequities in India: A health systems research study protocol

In this correspondence, we, co-authors and collaborators involved in the Towards Health Equity and Transformative Action on tribal health (THETA) study respond to a recent article published in Wellcome Open Research titled  Correspondence article on the research protocol titled 'Towards Health Equity and Transformative Action on tribal health (THETA) study to describe, explain and act on tribal health inequities in India: A health systems research study protocol' published in Wellcome Open Research in December 2019 In the first part, we provide overall clarifications on the THETA study and in the second part respond to specific comments by the authors of the aforementioned correspondence.

Sickle cell disease in India: a scoping review from a health systems perspective to identify an agenda for research and action

INTRODUCTION

Sickle cell disease (SCD) disproportionately impacts Adivasi (tribal) communities in India. Current research has focused on epidemiological and biomedical aspects but there has been scarce research on social determinants and health systems aspects. Given its fragmented distribution, resources and programmes have emerged in west and central India. This scoping review seeks to identify geographical and evidence gaps for action on SCD from a health systems lens.

METHODS

We followed a scoping review protocol, using Google Scholar and PubMed for published literature. Keywords used included sickle cell anaemia/disease, health systems, tribal and India. We used Google search for grey literature. We compiled a list of 55 records (of which 35 were retained), with about half pertaining directly to India and others relevant to similar settings. Results were organised and analysed using the WHO health systems framework to identify geographical and evidence gaps.

RESULTS

We found substantial literature on biomedical and clinical aspects of SCD but little on the design and implementation of programmes in community and Adivasi-specific contexts as well as on social determinants of SCD. There were regional gaps in knowledge in southern and northeast India. Wherever community-based programmes exist, they have originated in civil society initiatives and relatively limited state-led primary healthcare-based efforts pointing to weak agenda setting.

CONCLUSION

Both research and action on SCD especially among tribal populations need immediate attention. While geospatial epidemiology has been well understood, gaps remain in context-specific knowledge for action in several parts, as well as evidence gaps across several health system building blocks, including governance and financing of care. Despite publication of a draft policy, delayed adoption and lapses in implementation have limited the response largely to local communities and non-governmental organisations.