Setting research priorities for global pandemic preparedness: An international consensus and comparison with ChatGPT's output

Background

In this priority-setting exercise, we sought to identify leading research priorities needed for strengthening future pandemic preparedness and response across countries.

Methods

The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to identify research priorities for future pandemic preparedness. Eighty experts in global health, translational and clinical research identified 163 research ideas, of which 42 experts then scored based on five pre-defined criteria. We calculated intermediate criterion-specific scores and overall research priority scores from the mean of individual scores for each research idea. We used a bootstrap (n = 1000) to compute the 95% confidence intervals.

Results

Key priorities included strengthening health systems, rapid vaccine and treatment production, improving international cooperation, and enhancing surveillance efficiency. Other priorities included learning from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, managing supply chains, identifying planning gaps, and promoting equitable interventions. We compared this CHNRI-based outcome with the 14 research priorities generated and ranked by ChatGPT, encountering both striking similarities and clear differences.

Conclusions

Priority setting processes based on human crowdsourcing - such as the CHNRI method - and the output provided by ChatGPT are both valuable, as they complement and strengthen each other. The priorities identified by ChatGPT were more grounded in theory, while those identified by CHNRI were guided by recent practical experiences. Addressing these priorities, along with improvements in health planning, equitable community-based interventions, and the capacity of primary health care, is vital for better pandemic preparedness and response in many settings.

Research priorities to reduce the impact of COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused disruptions to the functioning of societies and their health systems. Prior to the pandemic, health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) were particularly stretched and vulnerable. The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) sought to systematically identify priorities for health research that would have the potential to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs.

Methods

The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method was used to identify COVID-19-related research priorities. All ISoGH members were invited to participate. Seventy-nine experts in clinical, translational, and population research contributed 192 research questions for consideration. Fifty-two experts then scored those questions based on five pre-defined criteria that were selected for this exercise: 1) feasibility and answerability; 2) potential for burden reduction; 3) potential for a paradigm shift; 4) potential for translation and implementation; and 5) impact on equity.

Results

Among the top 10 research priorities, research questions related to vaccination were prominent: health care system access barriers to equitable uptake of COVID-19 vaccination (ranked 1st), determinants of vaccine hesitancy (4th), development and evaluation of effective interventions to decrease vaccine hesitancy (5th), and vaccination impacts on vulnerable population/s (6th). Health care delivery questions also ranked highly, including: effective strategies to manage COVID-19 globally and in LMICs (2nd) and integrating health care for COVID-19 with other essential health services in LMICs (3rd). Additionally, the assessment of COVID-19 patients’ needs in rural areas of LMICs was ranked 7th, and studying the leading socioeconomic determinants and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs using multi-faceted approaches was ranked 8th. The remaining questions in the top 10 were: clarifying paediatric case-fatality rates (CFR) in LMICs and identifying effective strategies for community engagement against COVID-19 in different LMIC contexts.

Interpretation

Health policy and systems research to inform COVID-19 vaccine uptake and equitable access to care are urgently needed, especially for rural, vulnerable, and/or marginalised populations. This research should occur in parallel with studies that will identify approaches to minimise vaccine hesitancy and effectively integrate care for COVID-19 with other essential health services in LMICs. ISoGH calls on the funders of health research in LMICs to consider the urgency and priority of this research during the COVID-19 pandemic and support studies that could make a positive difference for the populations of LMICs.

[Diagnostic properties of case definitions of suspected COVID-19 in Chile, 2020Características diagnósticas das definições de caso suspeito de COVID-19 no Chile, 2020]

Objective

Compare the diagnostic properties of five case definitions of suspected COVID-19 that were used or proposed in Chile during the first eight months of the pandemic.

Methods

An analysis was done of the diagnostic properties (sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values) of three case definitions of suspected COVID-19 used in Chile between March and October 2020, as well as two alternative proposed definitions. The sample was 2,019 people with known results for the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2. Stepwise logistic regression was used to develop criterion 5, optimizing sensitivity and specificity values. Multifactor logistic regression was used to explore the association between demographic variables, symptoms and signs, and PCR positivity. Different positivity scenarios were analyzed and ROC curves were compared.

Results

The presence of anosmia (OR = 8.00; CI95%: 5.34-11.99), fever (OR = 2.15; CI95%: 1.28-3.59), and having been in close contact with a person sick with COVID-19 (OR = 2.89; CI95%: 2.16-3.87) were associated with a positive PCR result. According to the analysis of the ROC curve, criterion 5 had the highest capacity for discrimination, although there were no significant differences with the other four criteria.

Conclusions

Criterion 5-based on anosmia, close contact with people with COVID-19, and fever as sufficient unique elements-was the most sensitive in identifying suspected cases of COVID-19, a key aspect in controlling the spread of the pandemic.

Disability inclusiveness of government responses to COVID-19 in South America: a framework analysis study

Background

Disabled people are particularly exposed to the risks of COVID-19, as well as to the measures taken to address it, and their impact. The aim of the study was to examine the disability-inclusiveness of government responses to COVID-19 in four South American Countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru.

Methods

We conducted documentary research, using framework analysis to analyse reports, legislation, decrees, and other official documents that communicated measures taken in response to the pandemic, published from February 1st until May 22nd, 2020. We included documents reporting measures that affected disabled people either directly (measures specifically designed for disabled people) or indirectly (measures for the general population). We developed an analytical framework based on recommendations for disability-inclusive response to COVID-19 published by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Carribean, the World Health Organisation, and other international organisations.

Results

We analysed 72 documents. The findings highlight that while some positive measures were taken, the needs of disabled people were not fully considered. Several countries published recommendations for a disability-inclusive response to COVID-19, without ensuring their translation to practice. All countries took at least some steps to ensure access to financial support, health, and education for disabled people, but at the same time they also implemented policies that had a detrimental impact on disabled people. The populations that are most exposed to the impacts of COVID-19, including disabled people living in institutional care, were protected in several cases only by recommendations rather by legislation.

Conclusions

This study illustrates how the official government responses taken by four countries in the region – while positive, in several aspects – do not fully address the needs of disabled people, thus further disadvantaging them. In order to ensure response to COVID − 19 is disability inclusive, it is necessary to translate recommendations to practice, consider disabled people both in mainstream policy and in disability-specific measures, and focus on the long-term reconstruction phase.

Utilisation of mammography by women with mobility impairment in the UK: secondary analysis of cross-sectional data

OBJECTIVES

Research has shown that people with physical impairment report lower utilisation of preventive services. The aim of this study was to examine whether women with mobility impairments have lower odds of using mammography compared with women with no such impairment, and explore the factors that are associated with lower utilisation.

SAMPLE AND DESIGN

We performed secondary analysis, using logistic regressions, of deidentified cross-sectional data from the European Health Interview Survey, Wave 2. The sample included 9491 women from across the UK, 2697 of whom had mobility impairment. The survey method involved face-to-face and telephone interviews.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-report of the last time a mammogram was undertaken.

RESULTS

Adjusting for various demographic and socioeconomic variables, women with mobility impairment had 1.3 times (95% CI 0.70 to 0.92) lower odds of having a mammogram than women without mobility impairment. Concerning women with mobility impairment, married women had more than twice the odds of having a mammogram than women that had never been married (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.88). Women in Scotland had 1.5 times (95% CI 1.08 to 2.10) higher odds of undertaking the test than women in England. Women with upper secondary education had 1.4 times (95% CI 1.10 to 1.67) higher odds of undergoing the test than women with primary or lower secondary education. Also, women from higher quintiles (third and fifth quintiles) had higher odds of using mammography, with the women in the fifth quintile having 1.5 times (95% CI 1.02 to 2.15) higher odds than women from the first quintile.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to achieve equitable access to mammography for all women, it is important to acknowledge the barriers that impede women with mobility impairment from using the service. These barriers can refer to structural disadvantage, such as lower income and employment rate, transportation barriers, or previous negative experiences, among others.

Determinants of utilisation rates of preventive health services: evidence from Chile

BACKGROUND

Preventive health services play a vital role in population health. However, access to such services is not always equitably distributed. In this article, we examine the barriers affecting utilisation rates of preventive health services, using Chile as a case study.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study analysing secondary data from 206,132 Chilean adults, taken from the 2015 National Socioeconomic Characterisation Survey of the Government of Chile. We carried out logistic regressions to explore the relationship between the dependent variable use of preventive services and various demographic and socioeconomic variables.

RESULTS

Categories more likely to use preventive services were women (OR=1.16; 95%CI: 1.11-1.21) and inactive people (OR=1.41; 95%CI: 1.33-1.48). By contrast, single individuals (OR= 0.85 ; 95%CI: 0.80-0.91) and those affiliated with the private healthcare provider (OR= 0.89; 95%CI: 0.81-0.96) had fewer odds of undertaking preventive exams.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings underline the necessity of better information campaigns on the availability and necessity of preventive health services, addressing health inequality in accessing health services, and tackling lifestyle-related health risks. This is particularly important in countries - such as Chile - characterised by high income inequality and low utilisation rates of preventive health services.

The effects of neoliberal policies on access to healthcare for people with disabilities

Neoliberal reforms lead to deep changes in healthcare systems around the world, on account of their emphasis on free market rather than the right to health. People with disabilities can be particularly disadvantaged by such reforms, due to their increased healthcare needs and lower socioeconomic status. In this article, we analyse the impacts of neoliberal reforms on access to healthcare for disabled people. This article is based on a critical analytical review of the literature and on two case studies, Chile and Greece. Chile was among the first countries to introduce neoliberal reforms in the health sector, which led to health inequalities and stratification of healthcare services. Greece is one of the most recent examples of countries that have carried out extensive changes in healthcare, which have resulted in a deterioration of the quality of healthcare services. Through a review of the policies performed in these two countries, we propose that the pathways that affect access to healthcare for disabled people include: a) Policies directly or indirectly targeting healthcare, affecting the entire population, including disabled people; and b) Policies affecting socioeconomic determinants, directly or indirectly targeting disabled people, and indirectly impacting access to healthcare. The power differentials produced through neoliberal policies that focus on economic rather than human rights indicators, can lead to a category of disempowered people, whose health needs are subordinated to the markets. The effects of this range from catastrophic out-of-pocket payments to compromised access to healthcare. Neoliberal reforms can be seen as a form of structural violence, disproportionately affecting the most vulnerable parts of the population - such as people with disabilities - and curtailing access to basic rights, such as healthcare.

Access to healthcare for men and women with disabilities in the UK: secondary analysis of cross-sectional data

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate differences in access to healthcare between people with and without disabilities in the UK. The hypotheses were that: (1) people with disabilities would be more likely to have unmet healthcare needs and (2) there would be gender differences, with women more likely to report unmet needs.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We performed secondary analysis, using logistic regressions, of deidentified cross-sectional data from the European Health Interview Survey, Wave 2. The sample included 12 840 community-dwelling people over the age of 16 from across the UK, 5 236 of whom had a disability. The survey method involved face-to-face and telephone interviews.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Unmet need for healthcare due to long waiting lists or distance or transportation problems; not being able to afford medical examination, treatment, mental healthcare or prescribed medicines. All measures were self-reported.

RESULTS

Adjusting for age, sex and other factors, people with a severe disability had higher odds of facing unmet needs. The largest gap was in 'unmet need for mental healthcare due to cost', where people with a severe disability were 4.5 times (CI 95% 2.2 to 9.2) more likely to face a problem, as well as in 'unmet need due to cost of prescribed medicine', where people with a mild disability had 3.6 (CI 95% 2.2 to 5.9) higher odds of facing a difficulty. Women with a disability were 7.2 times (CI 95% 2.7 to 19.4) more likely to have unmet needs due to cost of care or medication, compared with men with no disability.

CONCLUSIONS

People with disabilities reported worse access to healthcare, with transportation, cost and long waiting lists being the main barriers. These findings are worrying as they illustrate that a section of the population, who may have higher healthcare needs, faces increased barriers in accessing services.

Utilisation of cancer screening services by disabled women in Chile

BACKGROUND

Research has shown that women with disabilities face additional challenges in accessing and using healthcare services compared to non-disabled women. However, relatively little is known about the utilisation of cancer screening services for women with disabilities. This study addresses this gap by examining the utilisation of the Papanicolaou test and mammography for disabled women in Chile.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional data, taken from a 2015 nationally-representative survey. Initially, we employed logistic regressions to test for differences in utilisation rates for the Papanicolaou test (66,281 observations) and the mammogram (35,294 observations) between disabled and non-disabled women. Next, logistic regressions were used to investigate the demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related factors affecting utilisation rates for cancer screening services for disabled women (sample sizes: 5,823 observations for the Papanicolaou test and 5,731 observations for the mammogram).

RESULTS

Disabled women were less likely to undergo screening tests than non-disabled women. For the Papanicolaou test and mammography, the multivariable regression models showed that living in rural areas, having higher education, being affiliated with a private health insurance company, giving a good health self-assessment score, and being under medical treatment for other illnesses were associated with higher utilisation rates. On the other hand, being single, inactive with regard to employment, and having a better income were linked with lower utilisation. While utilisation rates for both disabled and non-disabled women have increased since 2006, the utilisation disparity has slightly increased.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the influence of various factors in the utilisation rates of preventive cancer screening services for disabled women. To develop effective initiatives targeting inequalities in the utilisation of cancer screening tests, it is important to move beyond an exclusively single-disease approach and acknowledge the complexity of the patient population.