Search

Background: Women comprise 90% of patient-facing global healthcare workers (HCWs), yet remain underpaid, undervalued, and under-represented in leadership and decision-making positions, particularly across the Pacific region. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these health workplace inequalities. We sought to understand Pacific women HCWs experience from the COVID-19 frontline to contribute to policies aimed at addressing gendered gaps in regional health systems., Methods: Our interpretative phenomenological study used critical feminist and social theory, and a gendered health systems analytical framework. Data were collected using online focus groups and in-depth interviews with 36 Pacific regional participants between March 2020 and July 2021. Gender-specific content and women's voices were privileged for inductive analysis by Pacific and Australian women researchers with COVID-19 frontline lived experience., Findings: Pacific women HCWs have authority and responsibility resulting from their familial, biological, and cultural status, but are often subordinate to men. They were emancipatory leaders during COVID-19, and as HCWs demonstrated compassion, situational awareness, and concern for staff welfare. Pacific women HCWs also faced ethical challenges to prioritise family or work responsibilities, safely negotiate childbearing, and maintain economic security., Interpretation: Despite enhanced gendered power differentials during COVID-19, Pacific women HCWs used their symbolic capital to positively influence health system performance. Gender-transformative policies are urgently required to address disproportionate clinical and community care burdens and to protect and support the Pacific female health workforce., Funding: Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO), Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Co-funding: Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation, International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: GP and MC declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) Foundation and are members of ACEM. SK declares past employment at ACEM, CEB former ACEM committee membership, and LMH past contract payment from ACEM. GP reports visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to test health systems resilience worldwide. Low- and middle-income country (LMIC) health care systems have considerable experience in disasters and disease outbreaks. Lessons from the preparedness and responses to COVID-19 in LMICs may be valuable to other countries.This policy paper synthesises findings from a multiphase qualitative research project, conducted during the pandemic to document experiences of Pacific Island Country and Territory (PICT) frontline clinicians and emergency care (EC) stakeholders. Thematic analysis and synthesis of enablers related to each of the Pacific EC systems building blocks identified key factors contributing to strengthened EC systems.Effective health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic occurred when frontline clinicians and 'decision makers' collaborated with respect and open communication, overcoming healthcare workers' fear and discontent. PICT EC clinicians demonstrated natural leadership and strengthened local EC systems, supporting essential healthcare. Despite resource limitations, PICT cultural strengths of relational connection and innovation ensured health system resilience. COVID-19 significantly disrupted services, with long-tail impacts on non-communicable disease and other health burdens.Lessons learned in responding to COVID-19 can be applied to ongoing health system strengthening initiatives. Optimal systems improvement and sustainability requires EC leaders' involvement in current decision-making as well as future planning., Search Strategy and Selection Criteria: Search strategy and selection criteria We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Ovid, WHO resources, Pacific and grey literature using search terms 'emergency care', 'acute/critical care', 'health care workers', 'emergency care systems/health systems', 'health system building blocks', 'COVID-19', 'pandemic/surge event/disease outbreaks' 'Low- and Middle-Income Countries', 'Pacific Islands/region' and related terms. Only English-language articles were included., Funding: Phases 1 and 2A of this study were part of an Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO) initiative, supported by Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Copyright of the original work on which this publication is based belongs to WHO. The authors have been given permission to publish this manuscript. The authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this publication and they do not necessarily represent the views, decisions or policies of WHO. Co-funding for this research was received from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation via an International Development Fund Grant. RM is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Postgraduate Scholarship and a Monash Graduate Excellence Scholarship. GOR is supported by a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB is supported by a University of Queensland Development Research Fellowship. None of these funders played any role in study design, results analysis or manuscript preparation., Competing Interests: MC, GP, RM and GOR declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. GP reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, RM reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. GOR reports that he is the recipient of a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (Crown Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: This study explores emergency care (EC) and other frontline healthcare worker (HCW) experiences responding to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Pacific region. The crisis has reinforced the crucial role well-trained, resourced, and supported EC providers play in supporting vital health systems and services in all global regions not only during 'business as usual' periods, but in times of tremendous stress and surge., Methods: Qualitative data were collected from EC providers and relevant stakeholders in three research phases in 2020 and 2021. Data on the World Health Organization's (WHO) Human Resources Building Block, adapted for the Pacific EC context, was thematically analysed. Key findings were further analysed to identify enablers and barriers to effective EC pandemic management., Findings: 116 participants from across the Pacific region participated in this study. Five themes emerged: (1) EC providers performed multiple pandemic roles; (2) Importance of authorities' valuing frontline HCWs; (3) HCW mental health and exhaustion; (4) HCW tension managing stigma, personal/professional expectations, and chronic health needs; and (5) Building health and human resource capacity., Interpretation: This study significantly contributes to the limited scientific literature on HCW experiences responding to COVID-19 across the Pacific. Recommendations arising out of this research align with consensus priorities and standards that were identified pre-pandemic by health stakeholders across the Pacific for enhancing EC system development. With limited HCWs available for many Pacific nations, it is imperative the dignity and welfare of local HCWs is genuinely prioritised., Funding: Epidemic Ethics/WHO, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Co-funding: Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation, International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: MC, GP, RM and GOR declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. GP reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, RM reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. GOR reports that he is the recipient of an NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) across the Pacific region have been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and emergency care (EC) clinicians have been on the frontline of response efforts. Their responsibilities have extended from triage and clinical management of patients with COVID-19 to health system leadership and coordination. This has exposed EC clinicians to a range of ethical and operational challenges.This paper describes the context and methodology of a rapid, collaborative, qualitative research project that explored the experiences of EC clinicians in Pacific LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was conducted in three phases, with data obtained from online regional EC support forums, key informant interviews and focus group discussions. A phenomenological approach was adopted, incorporating a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Research findings, reported in other manuscripts in this collection, will inform multi-sectoral efforts to improve health system preparedness for future public health emergencies., Funding: Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO) initiative, supported by Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z (Phases 1 and 2A) and an Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: MC, GP, RM and GOR declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. GP reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, RM reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. GOR reports that he is the recipient of a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (Crown Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Universal access to safe, effective emergency care (EC) during the COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated its centrality to healthcare systems. The 'Leadership and Governance' building block provides policy, accountability and stewardship to health systems, and is essential to determining effectiveness of pandemic response. This study aimed to explore the experience of leadership and governance during the COVID-19 pandemic from frontline clinicians and stakeholders across the Pacific region., Methods: Australian and Pacific researchers collaborated to conduct this large, qualitative research project in three phases between March 2020 and July 2021. Data was gathered from 116 Pacific regional participants through online support forums, in-depth interviews and focus groups. A phenomenological approach shaped inductive and deductive data analysis, within a previously identified Pacific EC systems building block framework., Findings: Politics profoundly influenced pandemic response effectiveness, even at the clinical coalface. Experienced clinicians spoke authoritatively to decision-makers; focusing on safety, quality and service duty. Rapid adaptability, past surge event experience, team-focus and systems-thinking enabled EC leadership. Transparent communication, collaboration, mutual respect and trust created unity between frontline clinicians and 'top-level' administrators. Pacific cultural assets of relationship-building and community cohesion strengthened responses., Interpretation: Effective governance occurs when political, administrative and clinical actors work collaboratively in relationships characterised by trust, transparency, altruism and evidence. Trained, supported EC leadership will enhance frontline service provision, health security preparedness and future Universal Health Coverage goals., Funding: Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO), Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Co-funding: Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation, International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: MC, GP, RM and GOR declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. GP reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, RM reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. GOR reports that he is the recipient of a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (Crown Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted challenges for all health systems worldwide. This research aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 across the Pacific especially with regards to emergency care (EC) and clinicians' preparations and responses., Methods: A collaboration of Australia and Pacific researchers conducted prospective qualitative research over 18 months of the pandemic. In this three phase study data were gathered from Emergency Clinicians and stakeholders through online support forums, in-depth interviews and focus groups. A phenomenological methodological approach was employed to explore the lived experience of participants. This paper discusses the findings of the study regarding the EC building block of 'Infrastructure and Equipment.', Findings: Pre-existing infrastructure and equipment were not sufficient to help control the pandemic. Adequate space and correct equipment were essential needs for Pacific Island emergency clinicians, with donations, procurement and local ingenuity required for suitable, sustainable supplies and facilities. Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) conferred a sense of security and increased Health Care Workers willingness to attend to patients., Interpretation: Investing in adequate infrastructure and appropriate equipment is crucial for an effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The sustainability of such investments in the Pacific context is paramount for ongoing EC and preparation for future surge responses and disasters., Funding: Phases 1 and 2A of this study were part of an Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO) initiative, supported by Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Co-funding for this research was received from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation via an International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: M.C., G.P., R.M. and G.O.R. declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. G.P. reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, R.M. reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. G.O.R. reports that he is the recipient of a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. C.E.B. reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (Crown Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Emergency care (EC) addresses the needs of patients with acute illness and injury, and has fulfilled a critical function during the COVID-19 pandemic. 'Processes' (e.g. triage) and 'data' (e.g. surveillance) have been nominated as essential building blocks for EC systems. This qualitative research sought to explore the impact of the pandemic on EC clinicians across the Pacific region, including the contribution of EC building blocks to effective responses., Methods: The study was conducted in three phases, with data obtained from online support forums, key informant interviews and focus group discussions. There were 116 participants from more than 14 Pacific Island Countries and Territories. A phenomenological approach was adopted, incorporating inductive and deductive methods. The deductive thematic analysis utilised previously identified building blocks for Pacific EC. This paper summarises findings for the building blocks of 'processes' and 'data'., Findings: Establishing triage and screening capacity, aimed at assessing urgency and transmission risk respectively, were priorities for EC clinicians. Enablers included support from senior hospital leaders, previous disaster experience and consistent guidelines. The introduction of efficient patient flow processes, such as streaming, proved valuable to emergency departments, and checklists and simulation were useful implementation strategies. Some response measures impacted negatively on non-COVID patients, and proactive approaches were required to maintain 'business as usual'. The pandemic also highlighted the value of surveillance and performance data., Interpretation: Developing effective processes for triage, screening and streaming, among other areas, was critical to an effective EC response. Beyond the pandemic, strengthening processes and data management capacity will build resilience in EC systems., Funding: Phases 1 and 2A of this study were part of an Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO) initiative, supported by Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Co-funding for this research was received from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation via an International Development Fund Grant., Competing Interests: MC, GP, RM and GOR declare they are recipients of International Development Fund Grants from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation. GP reports past research funding from the Pacific Community (SPC) and visiting Faculty status at the University of Papua New Guinea and Fiji National University. Additionally, RM reports grants from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well as scholarships from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Monash University. GOR reports that he is the recipient of a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB reports past research consultancy funding from SPC., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Background: The increase in problematic substance use is a major problem in Canada and elsewhere, placing a heavy burden on health and justice system resources given a spike in drug-related offences. Thus, achievement of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target 3.5 to 'Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse' is important for Canada's overall realization of the SDGs, including SDG 3 (Good Health and Wellbeing). Since 2008, Vancouver's Downtown Community Court (DCC) has pioneered an innovative partnership among the justice, health and social service systems to address individuals' needs and circumstances leading to criminal behaviour. While researchers have examined the DCC's impact on reducing recidivism, with Canada's SDG health commitments in mind, we set out to examine the ways health and the social determinants of health (SDH) are engaged and framed externally with regard to DCC functioning, as well as internally by DCC actors. We employed a multi-pronged approach analyzing (1) publicly available DCC documents, (2) print media coverage, and (3) health-related discourse and references in DCC hearings., Results: The documentary analysis showed that health and the SDH are framed by the DCC as instrumental for reducing drug-related offences and improving public safety. The observation data indicate that judges use health and SDH in providing context, understanding triggers for offences and offering rationale for sentencing and management plans that connect individuals to healthcare, social and cultural services., Conclusions: Our study contributes new insights on the effectiveness of the DCC as a means to integrate justice, health and social services for improved health and community safety. The development of such community court interventions, and their impact on health and the SDH, should be reported on by Canada and other countries as a key contribution to SDG 3 achievement, as well as the fulfillment of other targets under the SDG framework that contain the SDH. Consideration should be given by Canada as to how to capture and integrate the important data generated by the DCC and other problem-solving courts into SDG reporting metrics. Certainly, the DCC advances the SDGs' underlying Leave No One Behind principle in a high-income country context.

Background: In 2018, the Australian Government, through a Senate-led Parliamentary Inquiry, sought the views of diverse stakeholders on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) implementation both domestically and as part of Australia's Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) program. One hundred and sixty-four written submissions were received. The submissions offered perspective and guidance from a rich cross-section of those involved, and with keen interest in, Australia's ODA-SDG commitment. This article identifies and explores the submissions to that Inquiry which placed impetus on Australia's ODA-SDG and health and development nexus. It then compares how the synthesized views, concerns and priorities of selected Inquiry stakeholders align with and reflect the Australian Government's treatment of SDG 3 in its SDG Voluntary National Review (VNR), as well as with the final Inquiry report summarizing submission content., Results: Four key themes were synthesized and drawn from the thirty-one stakeholder submissions included in our analysis. Disconnect was then found to exist between the selected stakeholder views and the Australian Government's SDG-VNR's treatment of SDG 3, as well as with the content of the Parliamentary Inquiry's final report with respect to the ODA-SDG and health and development nexus., Conclusions: We situate the findings of our analysis within the wider strategic context of the Australian Government's policy commitment to "step up" in the Pacific region. This research provides an insight into both multi-stakeholder and Federal Government views on ODA in the Indo-Pacific region, especially at a time when Australia's Pacific engagement has come to the forefront of both foreign and security policy. We conclude that the SDG agenda, including the SDG health and development agenda, could offer a unique vehicle for enabling a paradigm shift in the Australian Government's development approach toward the Pacific region and its diverse peoples. This potential is strongly reflected in stakeholder perspectives included in our analysis. However, study findings remind that the political determinants of health, and overlapping political determinants of SDG achievement, will be instrumental in the coming decade, and that stakeholders from different sectors need to be genuinely engaged in SDG-ODA policy-related decision-making and planning by governments in both developed and developing countries alike.

Background: In 2012, the European Commission funded Go4Health-Goals and Governance for Global Health, a consortium of 13 academic research and human rights institutions from both Global North and South-to track the evolution of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and provide ongoing policy advice. This paper reviews the research outputs published between 2012 and 2016, analyzing the thematic content of the publications, and the influence on global health and development discourse through citation metrics., Findings and Discussion: Analysis of the 54 published papers showed 6 dominant themes related to the SDGs: the formulation process for the SDG health goal; the right to health; Universal Health Coverage; voices of marginalized peoples; global health governance; and the integration of health across the other SDGs. The papers combined advocacy---particularly for the right to health and its potential embodiment in Universal Health Coverage-with qualitative research and analysis of policy and stakeholders. Go4Health's publications on the right to health, global health governance and the voices of marginalized peoples in relation to the SDGs represented a substantial proportion of papers published for these topics. Go4Health analysis of the right to health clarified its elements and their application to Universal Health Coverage, global health governance, financing the SDGs and access to medicines. Qualitative research identified correspondence between perceptions of marginalized peoples and right to health principles, and reluctance among multilateral organizations to explicitly represent the right to health in the goals, despite their acknowledgement of their importance. Citation metrics analysis confirmed an average of 5.5 citations per paper, with a field-weighted citation impact of 2.24 for the 43 peer reviewed publications. Citations in the academic literature and UN policy documents confirmed the impact of Go4Health on the global discourse around the SDGs, but within the Go4Health consortium there was also evidence of two epistemological frames of analysis-normative legal analysis and empirical research-that created productive synergies in unpacking the health SDG and the right to health., Conclusion: The analysis offers clear evidence for the contribution of funded programmatic research-such as the Go4Health project-to the global health discourse.

Objective: To identify the level of public support for a Human Rights Act for Queensland (HRAQ) and for inclusion of the right to health by participants in a public inquiry process., Methods: We reviewed the 492 written submissions to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee's Inquiry into a potential HRAQ and the transcripts documenting the public hearings held by the Committee in 2016., Results: A total of 465 written submissions were analysed; 419 (90%) were for a HRAQ. More than 80% of the 'for' submissions advocated the right to health's inclusion. At the seven public hearings, 72 persons made verbal submissions and most supported a HRAQ. Five major themes were identified in our synthesis of the public hearing transcripts. Three related specifically to health and human rights: 1) the need to consider the holistic health and human rights of Indigenous Queenslanders and Indigenous Queensland communities; 2) instilling a human rights culture in Queensland; and 3) access to health care and the underlying determinants of health. The other two themes related to the conduct of the Inquiry: 4) the importance of community participation in developing a HRAQ; and 5) concerns about the public consultation processes., Conclusion: This study found strong support in the majority of submissions for the Queensland Parliament to draft and enact a HRAQ, and for the inclusion of the right to health in such legislation. Implications for public health: The Queensland Parliament's enactment of a HRAQ that expressly included the right to health would increase the accountability and transparency of government health (and related) decision making and resource allocation, and would better identify and address health inequities across the state. This Act is imperative for improving the health and wellbeing of all Queenslanders, particularly rural and remote and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Queenslanders., (© 2017 The Authors.)

Since the new global health and development goal, Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3, and its nine targets and four means of implementation were introduced to the world through a United Nations (UN) General Assembly resolution in September 2015, right to health practitioners have queried whether this goal mirrors the content of the human right to health in international law. This study examines the text of the UN SDG resolution, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development , from a right to health minimalist and right to health maximalist analytic perspective. When reviewing the UN SDG resolution's text, a right to health minimalist questions whether the content of the right to health is at least implicitly included in this document, specifically focusing on SDG 3 and its metrics framework. A right to health maximalist, on the other hand, queries whether the content of the right to health is explicitly included. This study finds that whether the right to health is contained in the UN SDG resolution, and the SDG metrics therein, ultimately depends on the individual analyst's subjective persuasion in relation to right to health minimalism or maximalism. We conclude that the UN General Assembly's lack of cogency on the right to health's position in the UN SDG resolution will continue to blur if not divest human rights' (and specifically the right to health's) integral relationship to high-level development planning, implementation and SDG monitoring and evaluation efforts., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Verbal autopsy (VA) methods are designed to collect cause-of-death information from populations where many deaths occur outside of health facilities and where death certification is weak or absent. A VA consists of an interview with a relative or carer of a recently deceased individual in order to gather information on the signs and symptoms the decedent presented with prior to death. These details are then used to determine and assign a likely cause-of-death. At a population level this information can be invaluable to help guide prioritisation and direct health policy and services. To date VAs have largely been restricted to research contexts but many countries are now venturing to incorporate VA methods into routine civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems. Given the sensitive nature of death, however, there are a number of ethical, legal and social issues that should be considered when scaling-up VAs, particularly in the cross-cultural and socio-economically disadvantaged environments in which they are typically applied. Considering each step of the VA process this paper provides a narrative review of the social context of VA methods. Harnessing the experiences of applying and rolling out VAs as part of routine CRVS systems in a number of low and middle income countries, we identify potential issues that countries and implementing institutions need to consider when incorporating VAs into CRVS systems and point to areas that could benefit from further research and deliberation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems are typically run by governments to record every birth, adoption, death, marriage, and divorce that occurs among a country's population. Registration of vital events provides individuals with a formal relationship with the State and each other, and is the foundation of a person's identity, nationality, and legal status. At a population level, vital statistics are essential for effective planning and implementation of policies and services. Globally, strong CRVS systems are increasingly recognised as a crucial backbone for redressing health inequities and as a priority in strengthening global health and development efforts. Many countries, however, currently lack adequate and reliable CRVS systems, leaving many people vulnerable to statelessness, limited access to important government services (such as education and health services), and effective legal protection. Public health and humanitarian emergencies in such contexts can expose those already disadvantaged and marginalised to heightened risk. CRVS systems weakened by crises make registration difficult or impossible and unregistered people may be displaced or separated from their families, exacerbating their susceptibility. The presence of a strong CRVS system, therefore, can facilitate effective and cost-effective emergency responses, help prevent exploitation of individuals (particularly women and children), and help to rebuild communities post-crisis. This article will consequently review the international legal mandates that exist to strengthen CRVS systems globally, with particular view to public health and humanitarian emergencies. Identity and citizenship, and the socio-political contexts in which these concepts co-exist, are inevitably interconnected with CRVS. This can create potential for CRVS systems and data to be exploited as a political instrument. Grounding CRVS strengthening in a single binding, human rights law instrument is a potential way forward., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This paper explores the extent to which global health governance - in the context of the early implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals is grounded in the right to health. The essential components of the right to health in relation to global health are unpacked. Four essential functions of the global health system are assessed from a normative, rights-based, analysis on how each of these governance functions should operate. These essential functions are: the production of global public goods, the management of externalities across countries, the mobilization of global solidarity, and stewardship. The paper maps the current reality of global health governance now that the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals are beginning to be implemented. In theory, the existing human rights legislation would enable the principles and basis for the global governance of health beyond the premise of the state. In practice, there is a governance gap between the human rights framework and practices in global health and development policies. This gap can be explained by the political determinants of health that shape the governance of these global policies. Current representations of the right to health in the Sustainable Development Goals are insufficient and superficial, because they do not explicitly link commitments or right to health discourse to binding treaty obligations for duty-bearing nation states or entitlements by people. If global health policy is to meaningfully contribute to the realization of the right to health and to rights based global health governance then future iterations of global health policy must bridge this gap. This includes scholarship and policy debate on the structure, politics, and agency to overcome existing global health injustices.

Can the right to health, and particularly the core obligations of states specified under this right, assist in formulating and implementing universal health coverage (UHC), now included in the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals? In this paper, we examine how core obligations under the right to health could lead to a version of UHC that is likely to advance equity and rights. We first address the affinity between the right to health and UHC as evinced through changing definitions of UHC and the health domains that UHC explicitly covers. We then engage with relevant interpretations of the right to health, including core obligations. We turn to analyze what core obligations might bring to UHC, particularly in defining what and who is covered. Finally, we acknowledge some of the risks associated with both UHC and core obligations and consider potential avenues for mitigating these risks., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Public health professionals have a responsibility to protect and promote the right to health amongst populations, especially vulnerable and disenfranchised groups, such as people seeking asylum and whose health care is frequently compromised. As at 31 March 2016, there was a total of 3707 people (including 384 children) in immigration detention facilities or community detention in Australia, with 431 of them detained for more than 2 years. The Public Health Association of Australia and the Australian Medical Association assert that people seeking asylum in Australia have a right to health in the same way as Australian citizens, and they denounce detention of such people in government facilities for prolonged and indeterminate periods of time. The position of these two professional organisations is consistent with the compelling body of evidence demonstrating the negative impact detention has on health. Yet in recent years, both the Labour and Liberal parties-when at the helm of Australia's Federal Government-have implemented a suite of regressive policies toward individuals seeking asylum. This has involved enforced legal restrictions on dissenting voices of those working with these populations, including health professionals. This paper outlines Australia's contemporary offshore immigration detention policy and practices. It summarises evidence on asylum seeker health in detention centres and describes the government's practice of purposeful silencing of health professionals. The authors examine how Australia's treatment of asylum seekers violates their health rights. Based on these analyses, the authors call for concrete action to translate the overwhelming body of evidence on the deleterious impacts of immigration detention into ethical policy and pragmatic interventions. To this end, they provide four recommendations for action.

In 2001, technocrats from four multilateral organizations selected the Millennium Development Goals mainly from the previous decade of United Nations (UN) summits and conferences. Few accounts are available of that significant yet cloistered synthesis process: none contemporaneous. In contrast, this study examines health's evolving location in the first-phase of the next iteration of global development goal negotiation for the post-2015 era, through the synchronous perspectives of representatives of key multilateral and related organizations. As part of the Go4Health Project, in-depth interviews were conducted in mid-2013 with 57 professionals working on health and the post-2015 agenda within multilaterals and related agencies. Using discourse analysis, this article reports the results and analysis of a Universal Health Coverage (UHC) theme: contextualizing UHC's positioning within the post-2015 agenda-setting process immediately after the Global Thematic Consultation on Health and High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (High-Level Panel) released their post-2015 health and development goal aspirations in April and May 2013, respectively. After the findings from the interview data analysis are presented, the Results will be discussed drawing on Shiffman and Smith (Generation of political priority for global health initiatives: a framework and case study of maternal mortality.The Lancet2007; 370: : 1370-79) agenda-setting analytical framework (examining ideas, issues, actors and political context), modified by Benzianet al.(2011). Although more participants support the High-Level Panel's May 2013 report's proposal-'Ensure Healthy Lives'-as the next umbrella health goal, they nevertheless still emphasize the need for UHC to achieve this and thus be incorporated as part of its trajectory. Despite UHC's conceptual ambiguity and cursory mention in the High-Level Panel report, its proponents suggest its re-emergence will occur in forthcoming State led post-2015 negotiations. However, the final post-2015 SDG framework for UN General Assembly endorsement in September 2015 confirms UHC's continued distillation in negotiations, as UHC ultimately became one of a litany of targets within the proposed global health goal., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)

While the right to health is increasingly referenced in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) discussions, its contribution to global health and development remains subject to considerable debate. This hypothesis explores the potential influence of the right to health on the formulation of health goals in 4 major SDG reports. We analyse these reports through a social constructivist lens which views the use of rights rhetoric as an important indicator of the extent to which a norm is being adopted and/or internalized. Our analysis seeks to assess the influence of this language on goals chosen, and to consider accordingly the potential for rights discourse to promote more equitable global health policy in the future., (© 2015 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.)

Background: The Millennium Development Goals expire at the end of 2015 and global negotiations are underway to finalise the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals. Much activism has occurred encouraging a post-2015 health and development goal embedded in the highest attainable standard of health ('right to health'). Despite this, the right to health was absent in three key post-2015 intergovernmental Sustainable Development Goal proposals in 2014, one of which was reinforced by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2014 as the guiding document for ongoing interstate negotiations. This article examines why it appears the right to health, so far, is not gaining direct expression in post-2015 discussion., Methods: This qualitative research is part of a broader study using thematic and discourse analysis examining the high-level policy debate on health goals in the discourse of the formulation of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals. Key-informant interviews were conducted in two interview rounds in 2013 and 2014, with participants from multilateral and other organisations (government, academia, civil society and philanthropy) responsible for health in the post-2015 development agenda (or the post-2015 development agenda more broadly). This study synthesises data from both interview rounds on Health and Human Rights in post-2015 Sustainable Development Goal negotiations., Results: Six reasons why the right to health may not have gained effective traction in the unfolding post-2015 Member State negotiations were found. The first three reasons relate to broader issues surrounding human rights' (including sexual and reproductive health and rights) positioning within international relations discourse, and the second three relate to the challenges of transforming the human right to health into a practically applied post-2015 health goal., Conclusions: This paper reports the views of participants, many of who sit at the interface of United Nations and Member State negotiations, on the right to health's location (and projected trajectory) at two temporal junctions in evolving post-2015 negotiations. The interviews provide insight into high-level hesitancy that the right to health be expressly incorporated in the final post-2015 health and development goal, as well as documents participants' doubt that rights language will explicitly frame the broader Sustainable Development Goals, their targets and indicators.

Introduction: Universal Health Coverage (UHC), referring to access to healthcare without financial burden, has received renewed attention in global health spheres. UHC is a potential goal in the post-2015 development agenda. Monitoring of progress towards achieving UHC is thus critical at both country and global level, and a monitoring framework for UHC was proposed by a joint WHO/World Bank discussion paper in December 2013. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of the framework proposed by WHO/World Bank for global UHC monitoring framework in Kenya., Methods: The study utilised three documents--the joint WHO/World Bank UHC monitoring framework and its update, and the Bellagio meeting report sponsored by WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation--to conduct the research. These documents informed the list of potential indicators that were used to determine the feasibility of the framework. A purposive literature search was undertaken to identify key government policy documents and relevant scholarly articles. A desk review of the literature was undertaken to answer the research objectives of this study., Results: Kenya has yet to establish an official policy on UHC that provides a clear mandate on the goals, targets and monitoring and evaluation of performance. However, a significant majority of Kenyans continue to have limited access to health services as well as limited financial risk protection. The country has the capacity to reasonably report on five out of the seven proposed UHC indicators. However, there was very limited capacity to report on the two service coverage indicators for the chronic condition and injuries (CCIs) interventions. Out of the potential tracer indicators (n = 27) for aggregate CCI-related measures, four tracer indicators were available. Moreover the country experiences some wider challenges that may impact on the implementation and feasibility of the WHO/World Bank framework., Conclusion: The proposed global framework for monitoring UHC will only be feasible in Kenya if systemic challenges are addressed. While the infrastructure for reporting the MDG related indicators is in place, Kenya will require continued international investment to extend its capacity to meet the data requirements of the proposed UHC monitoring framework, particularly for the CCI-related indicators.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has foregrounded disability as a human rights and equity issue, elevating it to a priority global research area. Academics from Western universities are likely to play an increasing role in disability health research in developing countries. In such contexts, there is a need to bridge the gap between procedural ethics and the realities of disability research in cross-cultural contexts. We provide guidance on engaging in ethical disability health research that intersects with and upholds the CRPD. We highlight challenges and tensions in doing so, underscoring the need to be sensitive to the sociocultural and political context of disability that determines how ethical research should proceed. We conclude with 5 recommendations.