Search

Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) and child marriage are prevalent in many countries in Asia and Africa. These practices are a violation of human rights and have significant impacts on the physical and mental well-being of those affected. COVID-19 restrictions such as lockdowns and closure of schools may have influenced the occurrence of FGM/C and child marriage. This analysis reported on the impact of these restrictions on FGM/C and child marriage. The International Sexual Health And REproductive Health (I-SHARE) research team organised a multi-country online survey. Sampling methods included convenience samples, online panels, and population-representative samples. Data collected included the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on the occurrence, intention to practice and change in plans to organise FGM/C and child marriage. Data were analysed from 14 countries that reported on FGM/C and child marriage using basic descriptive statistics. Given it was an online survey, we had more responses from urban areas. Among the 22,724 overall participants, 8,829 participants (38.9%) responded to the survey items on FGM/C and child marriage and were included in this analysis. 249 (3.4%) participants stated that FGM/C occurred in their community during COVID-19. Out of this, COVID-19 affected the plans of 26 (20%) participants intending to organise circumcision and 15% of participants planned to organise FGM/C earlier. People with a worry about finances during COVID-19 were more likely to have an earlier plan to organise FGM/C during COVID-19. In total, 1,429 (13%) participants reported that child marriage occurred in their community. The pandemic affected plans of 52 (13%) participants intending to arrange child marriage and 7.7% (29/384) participants expressed intent to arrange the marriage sooner than planned. People with financial insecurities during COVID-19 were more likely to arrange a child marriage earlier. Thus, our study found that the pandemic impacted plans related to FGM/C and child marriage practices, resulting in many carrying out the practices sooner or later than initially planned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crowdsourcing strategies are useful in the development of public health interventions. Crowdsourcing engages end users in a co-creation process through challenge contests, designathons or online collaborations. Drawing on our experience of crowdsourcing in four African countries, we provide guidance on designing crowdsourcing strategies across seven steps: deciding on the type of crowdsourcing strategy, convening a steering committee, developing the content of the call for ideas, promotion, evaluation, recognizing finalists and sharing back ideas or implementing the solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study addresses the pervasive challenges of low hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV) testing rates coupled with the stigma associated with these diseases in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) with a special focus on Bangladesh. This study aims to introduce an innovative crowdsourcing intervention that involves medical students, a crucial cohort with the potential to shape healthcare attitudes. Through a structured crowdsourcing approach, the study designs and implements a digital intervention to counter stigma and promote testing among medical students in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Participants submitted brief videos or texts aiming to encourage hepatitis testing and reduce stigma. The call, advertised through meetings, emails, and social media, welcomed entries in English or Bengali over 3 weeks. A panel of six judges evaluated each entry based on clarity, impact potential, innovation, feasibility, and sustainability, awarding prizes to students behind the highest‐rated submissions. Seventeen videos and four text messages received an average score of 5.5 among 440 surveyed medical students, predominantly 22 years old (16%) and in their fourth year (21%). After viewing, 360 students underwent screening, identifying two previously undiagnosed HBV cases referred for care; no HCV infections were found. Notably, 41% expressed concerns about individuals with HBV working in hospitals or having a doctor living with HBV. In conclusion, this pilot showcases the power of medical students in spearheading campaigns to counter hepatitis stigma and encourage testing. By utilizing crowdsourcing, the study introduces an innovative approach to a persistent issue in LMICs specially in Bangladesh, offering a model that could potentially be adapted by other regions grappling with similar challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions to address the healthcare delivery gap that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process. While social innovations for health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovation. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. Methods and findings The research checklist was developed through a 3-step community-engaged process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a 3-round modified Delphi process. The call for entries solicited checklists and related items and was open between November 27, 2019 and February 1, 2020. In addition to the open call submissions and scoping review findings, a 17-item Social Innovation For Health Research (SIFHR) Checklist was developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist. The checklist was then refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys conducted between May and June 2020. The resulting checklist will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting, increase end-user engagement, and help assess social innovation projects. A limitation of the open call was requiring internet access, which likely discouraged participation of some subgroups. Conclusions The SIFHR Checklist will strengthen the reporting of social innovation for health research studies. More research is needed on social innovation for health., Author(s): Eneyi E. Kpokiri 1, Elizabeth Chen 2, Jingjing Li 3, Sarah Payne 4, Priyanka Shrestha 5, Kaosar Afsana 6, Uche Amazigo 7, Phyllis Awor 8, Jean-Francois de Lavison 9, [...]

Background: Institutional research mentorship is a form of mentorship whereby institutions foster mentor-mentee relationships. Research mentorship improves research effectiveness and supports relationships. However, resources are needed in order to institutionalize research mentorship tailored to low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). The aim of this study was to develop a consensus document on institutionalizing research mentorship through a modified Delphi process as part of the practical guide development process. Methods: This study used a two-round modified Delphi process, which is an iterative, structured approach of consensus decision making. Each participant was asked about a series of items related to research mentorship using Likert scale questions. Agreement for each item was pre-defined as ≥80% of participants rating the item as "agree" or "strongly agree." The items that reached agreement, were then discussed during round two at an in-person conference in Ethiopia. A separate group of individuals only participated virtually. For the final consensus survey, response rates and commenting rates (participants who wrote two or more comments) were compared among conference and non-conference participants. Results: The Delphi process led to the inception of three main themes in terms of developing research mentorship: leveraging existing resources, measuring and evaluating institutional mentorship, and encouraging a research mentorship life cycle. During the virtual first round, 59% (36/61) participants who were emailed completed the survey. In the second round, conference participants had a response rate of 79% (11/14) compared to non-conference participants with a response rate of 45% (21/47). Conference participants had a 100% (11/11) commenting rate whereas non-conference participants had a 38% (8/21) commenting rate. This study achieved consensus in both survey rounds for all 35 items on the consensus document. Conclusions: The data suggest that an in-person conference may increase participant engagement. The consensus developed through a modified Delphi method directly informed a practical guide on institutionalizing research mentorship in LMICs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although sexual health programming and clinical sexually transmitted infections (STIs) services have traditionally been developed through 'top-down' approaches, there is emerging evidence that participatory approaches benefit the development and implementation of such services. Although other studies have already highlighted the benefits of participation in research and implementation of clinical STIs services delivery, this narrative review focuses on how community participation in clinical STIs services delivery has been operationalised and on the various aspects of clinical STIs services delivery in which participatory processes have been implemented. A PubMed search was conducted in January 2022 using the search terms that reflected the topic of participatory processes in clinical STIs services delivery to identify relevant papers. Only peer-reviewed papers published in English were reviewed, and no timeframe was selected. After reviewing existing studies, we identified how community participation has been incorporated across stages of clinical STIs service delivery, including planning, developing, delivering, evaluating, and scaling up, as well as gaps and challenges faced in implementing such approaches. This review highlighted how a wide range of participatory processes characterised by varying depths of participation have been used in the above processes. Challenges such as funding, socio-cultural barriers, technical barriers and the digital divide, issues of quality assurance, and standardising the measurement of participation remain, which may impede the uptake of participatory processes in clinical STIs services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Population health surveys are rarely comprehensive in addressing sexual health, and population-representative surveys often lack standardised measures for collecting comparable data across countries. We present a sexual health survey instrument and implementation considerations for population-level sexual health research. The brief, comprehensive sexual health survey and consensus statement was developed via a multi-step process (an open call, a hackathon, and a modified Delphi process). The survey items, domains, entire instruments, and implementation considerations to develop a sexual health survey were solicited via a global crowdsourcing open call. The open call received 175 contributions from 49 countries. Following review of submissions from the open call, 18 finalists and eight facilitators with expertise in sexual health research, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), were invited to a 3-day hackathon to harmonise a survey instrument. Consensus was achieved through an iterative, modified Delphi process that included three rounds of online surveys. The entire process resulted in a 19-item consensus statement and a brief sexual health survey instrument. This is the first global consensus on a sexual and reproductive health survey instrument that can be used to generate cross-national comparative data in both high-income and LMICs. The inclusive process identified priority domains for improvement and can inform the design of sexual and reproductive health programs and contextually relevant data for comparable research across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many women with common sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and bacterial vaginosis (BV) are asymptomatic. Asymptomatic STIs/BV are as inflammatory as symptomatic infections in women, and genital inflammation has been shown to increase HIV risk. A Genital InFlammation Test (GIFT) point-of-care device for detecting genital inflammation is being developed and evaluated through a multi-centre clinical study. We aimed to explore how GIFT could be further developed and used in current management algorithms, with a focus on low- and middle-income contexts. Methods: We employed a modified Delphi approach in two rounds to gather input from expert participants in the field of STI management, including service providers, health programmers, researchers and policy makers. Both rounds' questionnaires were designed with input from the study's Scientific Advisory Board and administered as online surveys. Round one included open ended indepth questions and generated qualitative data that were analysed thematically. Themes from round one were used to inform items presented in the round two survey in order to build consensus. In round two, responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Consensus was reached if more than 70% of participants selected strongly agree or agree. Results: We had a total of 79 participants with 28 responses in round one and 70 in round two. Most participants were aged 25-54 years, and 58% of respondents were female. Consensus results showed that GIFT was more suitable for use as a screening tool rather than as a diagnostic tool. Attributes of GIFT prioritised for integration into STI management pathways include high sensitivity and specificity, affordability and ease of use. Potential barriers to its implementation and use include lack of provider awareness, high cost and stock-outs. Conclusion: While GIFT promises to be a valuable point--of-care screening tool for detecting genital inflammation in asymptomatic women, strong evidence of high specificity and sensitivity is needed for it to be incorporated into STI management guidelines. Costs and affordability are key for its use and there is need to sensitize and train healthcare providers and patients on its use. Stakeholder consultations will facilitate its roll-out and sustained use within healthcare systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant problem in global health today, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where antimicrobial stewardship programmes are yet to be successfully implemented. We established a partnership between AMR pharmacists from a UK NHS hospital and in Ho Teaching Hospital with the aim of enhancing antimicrobial stewardship knowledge and practice among healthcare providers through an educational intervention. We employed a mixed-method approach that included an initial survey on knowledge and awareness before and after training, followed by qualitative interviews with healthcare providers conducted six months after delivery of training. This study was carried out in two phases in Ho Teaching Hospital with healthcare professionals, including pharmacists, medical doctors, nurses and medical laboratory scientists. Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection. In the first phase, we surveyed 50 healthcare providers, including nurses (33%), pharmacists (29%) and biomedical scientists (23%). Of these, 58% of participants had engaged in continuous professional development on AMR/AMS, and above 95% demonstrated good knowledge on the general use of antibiotics. A total of 18 participants, which included four medical doctors, five pharmacists, four nurses, two midwives and three biomedical scientists, were interviewed in the second phase and demonstrated greater awareness of AMS practices, particularly the role of education for patients, as well as healthcare professionals. We found that knowledge and practice with AMS was markedly improved six months after the training session. There is limited practice of AMS in LMICs; however, through AMR-focused training, we demonstrated improved AMS skills and practice among healthcare providers in Ho Teaching Hospital. There is a need for continuous AMR training sessions for healthcare professionals in resource-limited settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major concern facing global health today, with the greatest impact in developing countries where the burden of infectious diseases is much higher. The inappropriate prescribing and use of antibiotics are contributory factors to increasing antibiotic resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship programmes (AMS) are implemented to optimise use and promote behavioural change in the use of antimicrobials. AMS programmes have been widely employed and proven to improve antibiotic use in many high-income settings. However, strategies to contain antimicrobial resistance have yet to be successfully implemented in low-resource settings. A recent toolkit for AMS in low- and middle-income countries by the World Health Organisation (WHO) recognizes the importance of local context in the development of AMS programmes. This study employed a bottom-up approach to identify important local determinants of antimicrobial prescribing practices in a low-middle income setting, to inform the development of a local AMS programme. Analysis of prescribing practices and interviews with prescribers highlighted priorities for AMS, which include increasing awareness of antibiotic resistance, development and maintenance of guidelines for antibiotic use, monitoring and surveillance of antibiotic use, ensuring the quality of low-cost generic medicines, and improved laboratory services. The application of an established theoretical model for behaviour change guided the development of specific proposals for AMS. Finally, in a consultation with stakeholders, the feasibility of the plan was explored along with strategies for its implementation. This project provides an example of the design, and proposal for implementation of an AMS plan to improve antibiotic use in hospitals in low-middle income settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health problem, but the learning needs of the medical profession on this topic are not well understood. The World Health Organization has called for better educational resources on AMR. Thus, we aimed to identify AMR learning objectives for physicians and medical trainees. Methods We designed a modified, two-round Delphi process to build consensus around these objectives, recruiting attendees at a one-day, multidisciplinary, international AMR symposium. Through review of the literature and discussion with experts in AMR, we generated an initial list of 17 objectives. We asked participants to rate the importance of including each objective in an AMR curriculum for physicians on a 5-point Likert scale, which ranged from "do not include" (1) to "very important to include" (5). Consensus for inclusion was predefined as ≥ 80% of participants rating the objective ≥ 4. Results The first round was completed by 30 participants, and the second by 21. Nobody declined to participate, but several people had to leave between rounds. Participants included physicians, researchers, graduate students, and a pharmacist, foundation manager, patient advocate, leader of an international financial institution, health administrator, and biomedical scientist. After the first round, 16 objectives met the consensus criteria, and participants suggested five additional topics. After the second round, 12 objectives met the consensus criteria (see Table 1). Objectives related to treatment of AMR most frequently met consensus criteria. Specific objectives with the highest consensus ratings were related to identifying infections not requiring antibiotics and recognizing the importance of using the narrowest spectrum antibiotic for the shortest period of time. Conclusion We successfully employed a modified, one-day Delphi process at an international, multidisciplinary AMR symposium to build consensus among experts and stakeholders regarding key learning objectives for AMR. This technique may be useful for guideline committees and other taskforces in the Infectious Diseases community. Our generated list may be useful for those developing AMR training materials for medical students and physicians. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating mentorship in health research resource-limited settings. WHO/TDR Global commissioned a group to develop a practical guide on research mentorship. This global qualitative evidence synthesis included data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review to identify and propose strategies to enhance research mentorship in low/middle-income country (LMIC) institutions., Methods: The crowdsourcing open call used methods recommended by WHO/TDR and solicited descriptions of strategies to enhance research mentorship in LMICs. The scoping review used the Cochrane Handbook and predefined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing health research mentorship in LMICs. Textual data describing research mentorship strategies from the open call and studies from the scoping review were coded into themes. The quality of evidence supporting themes was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach., Results: The open call solicited 46 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 77 studies. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognising mentorship as an institutional responsibility that should be provided and expected from all team members (8 strategies, 15 studies; moderate confidence); leveraging existing research and training resources to enhance research mentorship (15 strategies, 49 studies; moderate confidence); digital tools to match mentors and mentees and sustain mentorship relations over time (14 strategies, 11 studies; low confidence); nurturing a culture of generosity so that people who receive mentorship then become mentors to others (7 strategies, 7 studies; low confidence); peer mentorship defined as informal and formal support from one researcher to another who is at a similar career stage (16 strategies, 12 studies; low confidence)., Interpretation: Research mentorship is a collective institutional responsibility, and it can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions by leveraging already existing resources. The evidence from the crowdsourcing open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. There is a need for more formal research mentorship programmes in LMIC institutions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant problem in global health today, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where antimicrobial stewardship programmes are yet to be successfully implemented. We established a partnership between AMR pharmacists from a UK NHS hospital and in Ho Teaching Hospital with the aim of enhancing antimicrobial stewardship knowledge and practice among healthcare providers through an educational intervention. We employed a mixed-method approach that included an initial survey on knowledge and awareness before and after training, followed by qualitative interviews with healthcare providers conducted six months after delivery of training. This study was carried out in two phases in Ho Teaching Hospital with healthcare professionals, including pharmacists, medical doctors, nurses and medical laboratory scientists. Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection. In the first phase, we surveyed 50 healthcare providers, including nurses (33%), pharmacists (29%) and biomedical scientists (23%). Of these, 58% of participants had engaged in continuous professional development on AMR/AMS, and above 95% demonstrated good knowledge on the general use of antibiotics. A total of 18 participants, which included four medical doctors, five pharmacists, four nurses, two midwives and three biomedical scientists, were interviewed in the second phase and demonstrated greater awareness of AMS practices, particularly the role of education for patients, as well as healthcare professionals. We found that knowledge and practice with AMS was markedly improved six months after the training session. There is limited practice of AMS in LMICs; however, through AMR-focused training, we demonstrated improved AMS skills and practice among healthcare providers in Ho Teaching Hospital. There is a need for continuous AMR training sessions for healthcare professionals in resource-limited settings.

Background: Most people around the world do not have access to facility-based diagnostic testing, and the gap in availability of diagnostic tests is a major public health challenge. Self-testing, self-sampling, and institutional testing outside conventional clinical settings are transforming infectious disease diagnostic testing in a wide range of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We examined the delivery models of infectious disease diagnostic testing outside clinics to assess the impact on test uptake and linkage to care., Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching 6 databases and including original research manuscripts comparing testing outside clinics with conventional testing. The main outcomes were test uptake and linkage to care, delivery models, and adverse outcomes. Data from studies with similar interventions and outcomes within thematic areas of interest were pooled, and the quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019140828).We identified 10 386 de-duplicated citations, and 76 studies were included. Data from 18 studies were pooled in meta-analyses. Studies focused on HIV (48 studies), chlamydia (8 studies), and multiple diseases (20 studies). HIV self-testing increased test uptake compared with facility-based testing (9 studies: pooled odds ratio [OR], 2.59; 95% CI, 1.06-6.29; moderate quality). Self-sampling for sexually transmitted infections increased test uptake compared with facility-based testing (7 studies: pooled OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.97-3.12; moderate quality). Conclusions.  Testing outside of clinics increased test uptake without significant adverse outcomes. These testing approaches provide an opportunity to expand access and empower patients. Further implementation research, scale-up of effective service delivery models, and policies in LMIC settings are needed., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)