Search

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely used for establishing evidence of the effectiveness of interventions, yet public health interventions are often complex, posing specific challenges for RCTs. Although there is increasing recognition that qualitative methods can and should be integrated into RCTs, few frameworks and practical guidance highlight which qualitative methods should be integrated and for what purposes. As a result, qualitative methods are often poorly or haphazardly integrated into existing trials, and researchers rely heavily on interviews and focus group discussions. To improve current practice, we propose a framework for innovative qualitative research methods that can help address the challenges of RCTs for complex public health interventions., Methods: We used a stepped approach to develop a practical framework for researchers. This consisted of (1) a systematic review of the innovative qualitative methods mentioned in the health literature, (2) in-depth interviews with 23 academics from different methodological backgrounds working on RCTs of public health interventions in 11 different countries, and (3) a framework development and group consensus-building process., Results: The findings are presented in accordance with the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement categories for ease of use. We identify the main challenges of RCTs for public health interventions alongside each of the CONSORT categories, and potential innovative qualitative methods that overcome each challenge are listed as part of a Framework for the Integration of Innovative Qualitative Methods into RCTs of Complex Health Interventions. Innovative qualitative methods described in the interviews include rapid ethnographic appraisals, document analysis, diary methods, interactive voice responses and short message service, community mapping, spiral walks, pair interviews and visual participatory analysis., Conclusions: The findings of this study point to the usefulness of observational and participatory methods for trials of complex public health interventions, offering a novel contribution to the broader literature about the need for mixed methods approaches. Integrating a diverse toolkit of qualitative methods can enable appropriate adjustments to the intervention or process (or both) of data collection during RCTs, which in turn can create more sustainable and effective interventions. However, such integration will require a cultural shift towards the adoption of method-neutral research approaches, transdisciplinary collaborations, and publishing regimes.

Sharing individual-level data from clinical and public health research is increasingly being seen as a core requirement for effective and efficient biomedical research. This article discusses the results of a systematic review and multisite qualitative study of key stakeholders' perspectives on best practices in ethical data sharing in low- and middle-income settings. Our research suggests that for data sharing to be effective and sustainable, multiple social and ethical requirements need to be met. An effective model of data sharing will be one in which considered judgments will need to be made about how best to achieve scientific progress, minimize risks of harm, promote fairness and reciprocity, and build and sustain trust., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Efforts to internalize data sharing in research practice have been driven largely by developing international norms that have not incorporated opinions from researchers in low- and middle-income countries. We sought to identify the issues around ethical data sharing in the context of research involving women and children in urban India. We interviewed researchers, managers, and research participants associated with a Mumbai non-governmental organization, as well as researchers from other organizations and members of ethics committees. We conducted 22 individual semi-structured interviews and involved 44 research participants in focus group discussions. We used framework analysis to examine ideas about data and data sharing in general; its potential benefits or harms, barriers, obligations, and governance; and the requirements for consent. Both researchers and participants were generally in favor of data sharing, although limited experience amplified their reservations. We identified three themes: concerns that the work of data producers may not receive appropriate acknowledgment, skepticism about the process of sharing, and the fact that the terrain of data sharing was essentially uncharted and confusing. To increase data sharing in India, we need to provide guidelines, protocols, and examples of good practice in terms of consent, data preparation, screening of applications, and what individuals and organizations can expect in terms of validation, acknowledgment, and authorship., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: Public health interventions are increasingly evaluated using cluster-randomised trials in which groups rather than individuals are allocated randomly to treatment and control arms. Outcomes for individuals within the same cluster are often more correlated than outcomes for individuals in different clusters. This needs to be taken into account in sample size estimations for planned trials, but most estimates of intracluster correlation for perinatal health outcomes come from hospital-based studies and may therefore not reflect outcomes in the community. In this study we report estimates for perinatal health outcomes from community-based trials to help researchers plan future evaluations., Methods: We estimated the intracluster correlation and the coefficient of variation for a range of outcomes using data from five community-based cluster randomised controlled trials in three low-income countries: India, Bangladesh and Malawi. We also performed a simulation exercise to investigate the impact of cluster size and number of clusters on the reliability of estimates of the coefficient of variation for rare outcomes., Results: Estimates of intracluster correlation for mortality outcomes were lower than those for process outcomes, with narrower confidence intervals throughout for trials with larger numbers of clusters. Estimates of intracluster correlation for maternal mortality were particularly variable with large confidence intervals. Stratified randomisation had the effect of reducing estimates of intracluster correlation. The simulation exercise showed that estimates of intracluster correlation are much less reliable for rare outcomes such as maternal mortality. The size of the cluster had a greater impact than the number of clusters on the reliability of estimates for rare outcomes., Conclusions: The breadth of intracluster correlation estimates reported here in terms of outcomes and contexts will help researchers plan future community-based public health interventions around maternal and newborn health. Our study confirms previous work finding that estimates of intracluster correlation are associated with the prevalence of the outcome of interest, the nature of the outcome of interest (mortality or behavioural) and the size and number of clusters. Estimates of intracluster correlation for maternal mortality need to be treated with caution and a range of estimates should be used in planning future trials.

Public health interventions usually operate at the level of groups rather than individuals, and cluster randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are one means of evaluating their effectiveness. Using examples from six such trials in Bangladesh, India, Malawi and Nepal, we discuss our experience of the ethical issues that arise in their conduct. We set cluster RCTs in the broader context of public health research, highlighting debates about the need to reconcile individual autonomy with the common good and about the ethics of public health research in low-income settings in general. After a brief introduction to cluster RCTs, we discuss particular challenges we have faced. These include the nature of - and responsibility for - group consent, and the need for consent by individuals within groups to intervention and data collection. We discuss the timing of consent in relation to the implementation of public health strategies, and the problem of securing ethical review and approval in a complex domain. Finally, we consider the debate about benefits to control groups and the standard of care that they should receive, and the issue of post-trial adoption of the intervention under test.

Community-based initiatives have become a popular approach to addressing the health needs of underserved populations, in both low- and higher-income countries. This article presents findings from a study of female peer facilitators involved in a community-based maternal and newborn health intervention in urban slum areas of Mumbai. Using qualitative methods we explore their role perceptions and experiences. Our findings focus on how the facilitators understand and enact their role in the community setting, how they negotiate relationships and health issues with peer groups, and the influence of credibility. We contextualize this within broader conceptualizations of peer-led health interventions and offer recommendations for similar community-based health initiatives. (Contains 2 figures.)

BackgroundAdolescence is a critical period of maturation when nutrient needs are high, especially among adolescents entering pregnancy. Using individual-level data from 140,000 participants, we examined socioeconomic, nutrition, and pregnancy and birth outcomes for adolescent mothers (10-19 years) compared to older mothers in low and middle-income countries.MethodsThis study was conducted between March 16, 2018 and May 25, 2021. Data were obtained from 20 randomised controlled trials of micronutrient supplementation in pregnancy. Stratified analyses were conducted by age (10-14 years, 15-17 years, 18-19 years, 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40+ years) and geographical region (Africa, Asia). Crude and confounder-adjusted means, prevalence and relative risks of pregnancy, nutrition and birth outcomes were estimated using multivariable linear and log-binomial regression models with 95% confidence intervals.FindingsAdolescent mothers comprised 31.6% of our data. Preterm birth, small-for-gestational age (SGA), low birthweight (LBW) and newborn mortality followed a U-shaped trend in which prevalence was highest among the youngest mothers (10-14 years) and then reduced gradually, but increased again for older mothers (40+ years). When compared to mothers aged 20-29 years, there was a 23% increased risk of preterm birth, a 60% increased risk of perinatal mortality, a 63% increased risk of neonatal mortality, a 28% increased risk of LBW, and a 22% increased risk of SGA among mothers 10-14 years. Mothers 40+ years experienced a 22% increased risk of preterm birth and a 103% increased risk of stillbirth when compared to the 20-29 year group.InterpretationThe youngest and oldest mothers suffer most from adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Policy and programming agendas should consider both biological and socioeconomic/environmental factors when targeting these populations.FundingBill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Grant No: OP1137750).

BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

Contemporary challenges linked to public health and climate change demand more effective decision-making and urban planning practices, in particular by taking greater account of evidence. In order to do this, trust-building relationships between scientists and urban practitioners through collaborative research programmes is required. Based on a policy-relevant research project, Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health (CUSSH), this project aims to support the transformation of cities to meet environmental imperatives and to improve health with a quantitative health impact assessment. A case study in Rennes, France, focuses on the role of a policy decision-support tool in the production and use of knowledge to support evidence-informed decision-making. Although the primary objective of informing decision-making through evidence-based science is not fulfilled, the use of a decision-making support tool can lay the foundations for relationship-building. It can serve as a support for boundary-spanning activities, which are recognised for their effectiveness in linking science to action. This case study illustrates that the path of knowledge transfer from science to policy can be challenging, and the usefulness of using models may not be where it was thought to have been. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Socioeconomic inequalities in neonatal mortality are substantial in many developing countries. Little is known about how to address this problem. Trials in Asia and Africa have shown strong impacts on neonatal mortality of a participatory learning and action intervention with women's groups. Whether this intervention also reduces mortality inequalities remains unknown. We describe the equity impact of this women's groups intervention on the neonatal mortality rate (NMR) across socioeconomic strata.Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of all four participatory women's group interventions that were shown to be highly effective in cluster randomized trials in India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Malawi. We estimated intervention effects on NMR and health behaviours for lower and higher socioeconomic strata using random effects logistic regression analysis. Differences in effect between strata were tested.Results: Analysis of 69120 live births and 2505 neonatal deaths shows that the intervention strongly reduced the NMR in lower (50-63% reduction depending on the measure of socioeconomic position used) and higher (35-44%) socioeconomic strata. The intervention did not show evidence of 'elite-capture': among the most marginalized populations, the NMR in intervention areas was 63% lower [95% confidence interval (CI) 48-74%] than in control areas, compared with 35% (95% CI: 15-50%) lower among the less marginalized in the last trial year (P-value for difference between most/less marginalized: 0.009). The intervention strongly improved home care practices, with no systematic socioeconomic differences in effect.Conclusions: Participatory women's groups with high population coverage benefit the survival chances of newborns from all socioeconomic strata, and perhaps especially those born into the most deprived households. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore the factors affecting intra-household food allocation practices to inform the development of interventions to prevent low birth weight in rural plains of Nepal.Design: Qualitative methodology using purposive sampling to explore the barriers and facilitating factors to improved maternal nutrition.Setting: Rural Dhanusha District, Nepal.Subjects: We purposively sampled twenty-five young daughters-in-law from marginalised groups living in extended families and conducted semi-structured interviews with them. We also conducted one focus group discussion with men and one with female community health volunteers who were mothers-in-law.Results: Gender and age hierarchies were important in household decision making. The mother-in-law was responsible for ensuring that a meal was provided to productive household members. The youngest daughter-in-law usually cooked last and ate less than other family members, and showed respect for other family members by cooking only when permitted and deferring to others' choice of food. There were limited opportunities for these women to snack between main meals. Daughters-in-law' movement outside the household was restricted and therefore family members perceived that their nutritional need was less. Poverty affected food choice and families considered cost before nutritional value.Conclusions: It is important to work with the whole household, particularly mothers-in-law, to improve maternal nutrition. We present five barriers to behaviour change: poverty; lack of knowledge about cheap nutritional food, the value of snacking, and cheap nutritional food that does not require cooking; sharing food; lack of self-confidence; and deference to household guardians. We discuss how we have targeted our interventions to develop knowledge, discuss strategies to overcome barriers, engage mothers-in-law, and build the confidence and social support networks of pregnant women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In a stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial, clusters receive the intervention at different time points, and the order in which they received it is randomised. Previous systematic reviews of stepped wedge trials have documented a steady rise in their use between 1987 and 2010, which was attributed to the design's perceived logistical and analytical advantages. However, the interventions included in these systematic reviews were often poorly reported and did not adequately describe the analysis and/or methodology used. Since 2010, a number of additional stepped wedge trials have been published. This article aims to update previous systematic reviews, and consider what interventions were tested and the rationale given for using a stepped wedge design. Methods: We searched PubMed, PsychINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and the Current Controlled Trials Register for articles published between January 2010 and May 2014. We considered stepped wedge randomised controlled trials in all fields of research. We independently extracted data from retrieved articles and reviewed them. Interventions were then coded using the functions specified by the Behaviour Change Wheel, and for behaviour change techniques using a validated taxonomy. Results: Our review identified 37 stepped wedge trials, reported in 10 articles presenting trial results, one conference abstract, 21 protocol or study design articles and five trial registrations. These were mostly conducted in developed countries (n = 30), and within healthcare organisations (n = 28). A total of 33 of the interventions were educationally based, with the most commonly used behaviour change techniques being 'instruction on how to perform a behaviour' (n = 32) and 'persuasive source' (n = 25). Authors gave a wide range of reasons for the use of the stepped wedge trial design, including ethical considerations, logistical, financial and methodological. The adequacy of reporting varied across studies: many did not provide sufficient detail regarding the methodology or calculation of the required sample size. Conclusions: The popularity of stepped wedge trials has increased since 2010, predominantly in high-income countries. However, there is a need for further guidance on their reporting and analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers should consider five questions before starting a stepped wedge trial. Why are you planning one? Researchers sometimes think that stepped wedge trials are useful when there is little doubt about the benefit of the intervention being tested. However, if the primary reason for an intervention is to measure its effect, without equipoise there is no ethical justification for delaying implementation in some clusters. By contrast, if you are undertaking pragmatic research, where the primary reason for rolling out the intervention is for it to exert its benefits, and if phased implementation is inevitable, a stepped wedge trial is a valid option and provides better evidence than most non-randomized evaluations. What design will you use? Two common stepped wedge designs are based on the recruitment of a closed or open cohort. In both, individuals may experience both control and intervention conditions and you should be concerned about carry-over effects. In a third, continuous-recruitment, short-exposure design, individuals are recruited as they become eligible and experience either control or intervention condition, but not both. How will you conduct the primary analysis? In stepped wedge trials, control of confounding factors through secular variation is essential. 'Vertical' approaches preserve randomization and compare outcomes between randomized groups within periods. 'Horizontal' approaches compare outcomes before and after crossover to the intervention condition. Most analysis models used in practice combine both types of comparison. The appropriate analytic strategy should be considered on a case-by-case basis. How large will your trial be? Standard sample size calculations for cluster randomized trials do not accommodate the specific features of stepped wedge trials. Methods exist for many stepped wedge designs, but simulation-based calculations provide the greatest flexibility. In some scenarios, such as when the intracluster correlation coefficient is moderate or high, or the cluster size is large, a stepped wedge trial may require fewer clusters than a parallel cluster trial. How will you report your trial? Stepped wedge trials are currently challenging to report using CONSORT principles. Researchers should consider how to demonstrate balance achieved by randomization and how to describe trends for outcomes in both intervention and control clusters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Three arguments are usually invoked in favour of stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trials: the logistic convenience of implementing an intervention in phases, the ethical benefit of providing the intervention to all clusters, and the potential to enhance the social acceptability of cluster randomised controlled trials. Are these alleged benefits real? We explored the logistic, ethical, and political dimensions of stepped wedge trials using case studies of six recent evaluations. Methods: We identified completed or ongoing stepped wedge evaluations using two systematic reviews. We then purposively selected six with a focus on public health in high, middle, and low-income settings. We interviewed their authors about the logistic, ethical, and social issues faced by their teams. Two authors reviewed interview transcripts, identified emerging issues through qualitative thematic analysis, reflected upon them in the context of the literature, and invited all participants to co-author the manuscript. Results: Our analysis raises three main points. First, the phased implementation of interventions can alleviate problems linked to simultaneous roll-out, but also brings new challenges. Issues to consider include the feasibility of organising intervention activities according to a randomised sequence, estimating time lags in implementation and effects, and accommodating policy changes during the trial period. Second, stepped wedge trials, like parallel cluster trials, require equipoise: without it, randomising participants to a control condition, even for a short time, remains problematic. In stepped wedge trials, equipoise is likely to lie in the degree of effect, effectiveness in a specific operational milieu, and the balance of benefit and harm, including the social value of better evaluation. Third, the strongest arguments for a stepped wedge design are logistic and political rather than ethical. The design is advantageous when simultaneous roll-out is impractical and when it increases the acceptability of using counterfactuals. Conclusions: The logistic convenience of phased implementation is context-dependent, and may be vitiated by the additional requirements of phasing. The potential for stepped wedge trials to enhance the social acceptability of cluster randomised trials is real, but their ethical legitimacy still rests on demonstrating equipoise and its configuration for each research question and setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The trial addresses the general question of whether community resource centers run by a non-government organization improve the health of women and children in slums. The resource centers will be run by the Society for Nutrition, Education and Health Action, and the trial will evaluate their effects on a series of public health indicators. Each resource center will be located in a vulnerable Mumbai slum area and will serve as a base for salaried community workers, supervised by officers and coordinators, to organize the collection and dissemination of health information, provision of services, home visits to identify and counsel families at risk, referral of individuals and families to appropriate services and support for their access, meetings of community members and providers, and events and campaigns on health issues. Methods/design: A cluster randomized controlled trial in which 20 urban slum areas with resource centers are compared with 20 control areas. Each cluster will contain approximately 600 households and randomized allocation will be in three blocked phases, of 12, 12 and 16 clusters. Any resident of an intervention cluster will be able to participate in the intervention, but the resource centers will target women and children, particularly women of reproductive age and children under 5. The outcomes will be assessed through a household census after 2 years of resource center operations. The primary outcomes are unmet need for family planning in women aged 15 to 49 years, proportion of children under 5 years of age not fully immunized for their ages, and proportion of children under 5 years of age with weight for height less than 2 standard deviations below the median for age and sex. Secondary outcomes describe adolescent pregnancies, home deliveries, receipt of conditional cash transfers for institutional delivery, other childhood anthropometric indices, use of public sector health and nutrition services, indices of infant and young child feeding, and consultation for violence against women and children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Operations research (OR) is well established in India and is also a prominent feature of the global and local agendas for tuberculosis (TB) control. India accounts for a quarter of the global burden of TB and of new cases. Multidrug-resistant TB is a significant problem in Mumbai, India’s most populous city, and there have been recent reports of totally resistant TB. Much thought has been given to the role of OR in addressing programmatic challenges, by both international partnerships and India’s Revised National TB Control Programme. We attempt to summarize the major challenges to TB control in Mumbai, with an emphasis on drug resistance. Specific challenges include diagnosis of TB and defining cure, detecting drug resistant TB, multiple sources of health care in the private, public and informal sectors, co-infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and a concurrent epidemic of non-communicable diseases, suboptimal prescribing practices, and infection control. We propose a local agenda for OR: modeling the effects of newer technologies, active case detection, and changes in timing of activities, and mapping hotspots and contact networks; modeling the effects of drug control, changing the balance of ambulatory and inpatient care, and adverse drug reactions; modeling the effects of integration of TB and HIV diagnosis and management, and preventive drug therapy; and modeling the effects of initiatives to improve infection control. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Neonatal mortality remains high in rural Nepal. Previous work suggests that local women's groups can effect significant improvement through community mobilisation. The possibility of identification and management of newborn infections by community-based workers has also arisen.Methods/design: The objective of this trial is to evaluate the effects on newborn health of two community-based interventions involving Female Community Health Volunteers. MIRA Dhanusha community groups: a participatory intervention with women's groups. MIRA Dhanusha sepsis management: training of community volunteers in the recognition and management of neonatal sepsis.The study design is a cluster randomized controlled trial involving 60 village development committee clusters allocated 1:1 to two interventions in a factorial design. MIRA Dhanusha community groups: Female Community Health Volunteers (FCHVs) are supported in convening monthly women's groups. Nine groups per cluster (270 in total) work through two action research cycles in which they (i) identify local issues around maternity, newborn health and nutrition, (ii) prioritize key problems, (iii) develop strategies to address them, (iv) implement the strategies, and (v) evaluate their success. Cycle 1 focuses on maternal and newborn health and cycle 2 on nutrition in pregnancy and infancy and associated postpartum care practices. MIRA Dhanusha sepsis management: FCHVs are trained to care for vulnerable newborn infants. They (i) identify local births, (ii) identify low birth weight infants, (iii) identify possible newborn infection, (iv) manage the process of treatment with oral antibiotics and referral to a health facility to receive parenteral gentamicin, and (v) follow up infants and support families.Primary Outcome: neonatal mortality rates.Secondary Outcomes: MIRA Dhanusha community group: stillbirth, infant and under-two mortality rates, care practices and health care seeking behaviour, maternal diet, breastfeeding and complementary feeding practices, maternal and under-2 anthropometric status. MIRA Dhanusha sepsis management: identification and treatment of neonatal sepsis by community health volunteers, infection-specific neonatal mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this perspective, Delan Devakumar and David Osrin discuss Abrahams and colleagues' findings in the context of evidence about child homicide in different countries, and consider etiology along with implications for child protection and prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The United Nations Millennium Development Goals look to substantial improvements in child and maternal survival. Morbidity and mortality during pregnancy, delivery and the postnatal period are prime obstacles to achieving these goals. Given the increasing importance of urban health to global prospects, Mumbai's City Initiative for Newborn Health aims to improve maternal and neonatal health in vulnerable urban slum communities, through a combination of health service quality improvement and community participation. The protocol describes a trial of community intervention aimed at improving prevention, care seeking and outcomes. Objective: To test an intervention that supports local women as facilitators in mobilising communities for better health care. Community women's groups will build an understanding of their potential to improve maternal and infant health, and develop and implement strategies to do so. Design: Cluster-randomized controlled trial. Methods: The intervention will employ local community-based female facilitators to convene groups and help them to explore maternal and neonatal health issues. Groups will meet fortnightly through a seven-phase process of sharing experiences, discussion of the issues raised, discovery of potential community strengths, building of a vision for action, design and implementation of community strategies, and evaluation. The unit of allocation will be an urban slum cluster of 1000-1500 households. 48 clusters have been randomly selected after stratification by ward. 24 clusters have been randomly allocated to receive the community intervention. 24 clusters will act as control groups, but will benefit from health service quality improvement. Indicators of effect will be measured through a surveillance system implemented by the project. Key distal outcome indicators will be neonatal mortality and maternal and neonatal morbidity. Key proximate outcome indicators will be home care practices, uptake of antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, and care for maternal and neonatal illness. Data will be collected through a vital registration system for births and deaths in the 48 study clusters. Structured interviews with families will be conducted at about 6 weeks after index deliveries. We will also collect both quantitative and qualitative data to support a process evaluation. Trial registration: Current controlled trials ISRCTN96256793 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes the critical first steps taken to revitalize the vast public health system of Mumbai City through the active participation of personnel from within the system. It focuses on one of two components of an ambitious action-research project aimed at improving the survival and health of newborn infants and mothers living in slum communities in Mumbai. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The persistence of high perinatal and neonatal mortality rates in many developing countries make efforts to improve perinatal care in the home and at local health facilities important public health concerns. We describe a study which aims to evaluate a community-level participatory intervention in rural Nepal. The effectiveness of community-based action research interventions with mothers and other key members of the community in improving perinatal health outcomes is being examined using a cluster randomized, controlled trial covering a population of 28 000 married women of reproductive age. The unit of randomization was the village development committee (VDC): 12 VDCs receive the intervention while 12 serve as controls. The key elements of the intervention are the activities of female facilitators, each of whom works in one VDC facilitating the activities of women''s groups in addressing problems in pregnancy, childbirth and the newborn period. Each group moves through a participatory planning cycle of assessment, sharing experiences, planning, action and reassessment, with the aim of improving essential maternal and newborn care. Outcomes assessed are neonatal and perinatal mortality rates, changes in patterns of home care, health care seeking and referral. The study also aims to generate programmatic information on the process of implementation in communities. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article focuses on the role of innovation is essential in addressing health issues including increasing inequity, disease burden, the impact of conflict, migration and climate change. It offers information on cross-disciplinary research, evidence-based practice, and cultural, social and economic determinants of health. It focuses on the participation of low-income and middleincome countries (LMICs) in managing health issues.