An analysis of gaps in primary healthcare (PHC) service delivery for diabetes mellitus and hypertension (HTN) to collaboratively identify and co-design tailored improvement interventions used a participatory research approach using five-steps: situation analysis, stakeholder engagement to identify service delivery gaps, prioritization of interventions, implementation planning informed by contextual factors and monitoring and evaluation. Two multi-stakeholder workshops were conducted involving health management teams, PHC workers, community health promoters, patients, and researchers. Priority interventions co-designed through the participatory approach included targeted PHC worker training, improved access to clinical guidelines, structured mentorship and supervision, strengthened community outreach, and improved availability of diagnostic tools and essential medicines. The action and evaluation steps are still to be covered. Participatory approaches to intervention development is argued to facilitate stakeholder ownership and contextually appropriate solutions.
Monitoring equity and research policy
mSaada, a mobile phone application, is designed to facilitate counselling, data collection, and client follow-up for human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening in western Kenya. Community health promoters (CHPs) in Kisumu County are trained in mSaada-assisted HPV screening before offering self-collection testing during routine home visits. HPV results and follow-up information are communicated to women by text or home visit and recorded in clinic files. Women testing positive were offered thermal ablation treatment at local health facilities free of charge. All CHPs completed an mSaada usability survey and focus group discussion at the end of the pilot.. Device and application issues were minimal, with charging problems, slow performance, and QR code scanner malfunctions being the most common. Usability scores indicated high satisfaction. mSaada proved a useful tool for facilitating HPV-based screening during home visits, and workflow observations and qualitative data identified specific improvements in workflow, device quality, and app design to enhance impact and sustainability.
This study explored the effect of anticipatory action on outcomes during a cholera outbreak in a hypothetical health zone in the Democratic Republic of the Congo by means of a cholera response model. Using a system dynamics approach, a cholera response model was developed on the basis of a published cholera response simulation model for Yemen. The model evaluated four intervention scenarios: (i) existing responses to cholera outbreaks; (ii) anticipatory action (that is, immediate interventions); (iii) anticipatory action plus one vaccine dose; and (iv) anticipatory action plus two vaccine doses. The model showed that immediate interventions can function as an essential bridge to comprehensive vaccination, particularly in resource-constrained settings where timely coordination is crucial. Anticipatory action can reduce the total number of cholera cases and booster vaccinations are crucial for preventing subsequent waves of infection due to waning immunity following single-dose vaccination. The authors argue that dynamic models are useful for simulating outbreaks and can foster proactive, evidence-based public health planning, thereby supporting the shift from reactive to anticipatory strategies. Continuous refinement of the model with real-world data will enhance its applicability.
This paper assessed the country’s progress in implementing the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005). The joint external evaluation, Zimbabwe’s second since joining the IHR framework, brought together national experts and international evaluators from WHO, Africa CDC, ECSA-HC, Kenya and Uganda National Public Health Institutes, IFRC, UNFPA, and other partners. Using the WHO joint external evaluation Tool version 3.0, the evaluation reviewed 19 technical areas covering prevention, detection, and response capacities, as well as points of entry, chemical, and radiation emergencies. The evaluation highlighted commendable progress in several areas of IHR implementation, including strong political commitment and legal frameworks supporting health security coordination, functional national and subnational laboratories capable of timely detection of priority diseases, established coordination mechanisms and surge capacity during public health emergencies and competent human resources across multiple levels of government to support implementation.
Health Impact Assessment (HIA) advances Health in All Policies by identifying impacts of proposed actions on health and equity and recommending changes to address these impacts. Since the Gothenburg Consensus Statement in 1999, HIA has been applied to policies, plans, programmes and projects in multiple sectors and settings across the world. Despite demonstrated effectiveness, its use across the world is inconsistent with few nations systematically using HIA. In a global context of increasing health inequities, pandemics, climate change, and economic crises, HIA can help integrate health and equity into decision making. There is a need for research to support the ongoing evolution and development of HIA. This paper presents a research agenda for the field of HIA, drawn a mixed method approach utilising insights of approximately 280 participants through an international online survey and participatory workshops. The authors identified four research priorities: (1) Institutionalisation - Sustaining and institutionalising HIA in varying contexts and levels. (2) Influence - Identifying mechanisms and strategies that can be employed to effectively influence stakeholders and decision making. (3) Equity and Participation - Analysing the role of equity, justice, power and participation in HIA, and (4) Methodology - Improving HIA Methods to understand the complex relationships between proposed actions, health and health equity outcomes and identifying what to do. We developed research questions for each theme. The research agenda advocates for sustained research and practice to strengthen impact and address knowledge gaps in the field. Functioning as a roadmap for both researchers and funders, it aims to contribute to a healthier and more equitable world. Recognising the valuable role of HIA in addressing global health challenges, the agenda encourages researchers to investigate, develop, and advance the field of HIA.
Health Impact Assessment (HIA) provides a practical set of tools to appraise the potential health effects of a policy, programme, or project prior to implementation. HIA has gained significant attention in recent decades due to its utility in facilitating a broader understanding of health and bringing diverse stakeholders and evidence into decision-making processes. Despite this interest in HIA its implementation remains challenging within governance, decision making, and regulatory contexts. The authors used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0 as a methodological framework to identify potential factors influencing implementation of HIA from an implementation science perspective. The findings suggest that building wider HIA support, awareness, and capacity are essential to progressing HIA, and that this is also dependent on wider public health advocacy.
This policy brief emerges from a Sustainable HIV Prevention Initiative Convening held in Lilongwe, Malawi on February 18-19, 2025, hosted by the Government of Malawi. The brief presents priority recommendations for governments navigating external funding transitions, including strategies for increasing domestic and innovative financing mechanisms, accelerated integration of HIV services into national health systems and primary care, and ensuring continuation of people-centered HIV services including prevention for key and vulnerable populations. Drawing from the successful Blantyre Prevention Strategy model - a district-based approach that strengthens local institutional capacity for HIV prevention through data-driven decision making, quality improvement, and community engagement - the brief advocates for bold government actions to maintain progress toward ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030 despite declining donor support.
This study examined pre-eclampsia management in Sierra Leone and Zambia, where the condition contributes significantly to maternal mortality (70% of 30,000 annual deaths occur in Sub-Saharan Africa). The authors implemented policy labs, a user-centric approach bringing together diverse stakeholders to integrate new evidence into care pathways. Working with the Policy Institute and local stakeholders, the labs focused on improving timely detection and early delivery strategies for pre-eclampsia cases. Participants identified lack of awareness as a key barrier and recommended locally co-designed community strategies to increase access to timely management. The policy lab approach proved effective in both settings for translating new knowledge into policy and action.
This qualitative pre-post evaluation study examined the transition to an electronic Research Ethics Information Management System at Muhimbili University through interviews with 16 faculty members with experience in both paper-based and electronic systems. Using thematic analysis, researchers identified key strengths including system convenience and improved records management. Limitations centered on demands for reliable information and communication technologies and reduced reviewer-researcher interaction. The findings underscore both benefits and challenges of implementing paperless systems in resource-limited settings, recommending system automation, strengthened institutional capacity, and further studies on system adoptability, particularly in resource-constrained environments.
This paper assessed the World Health Organization’s approaches to health equity in select health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts from 2008 to 2016. The authors found that the World Health Organization usually measures health equity by comparing groups, explicitly specifies three approaches to health equity and considers health equity inconsistently both in terms of socioeconomic status and other social determinants of health. Socioeconomic status was given substantially more attention than other social determinants of health. The authors argue that there is misalignment with the World Health Organization’s stated approaches to tackle health inequity and its discourses around health equity. This incongruence, they argue, increases the likelihood of pursuing short-term solutions and not sustainably addressing the root causes of health inequity. They argue that critical discourse analysis’ focus on power allowed for an understanding of why ‘radical’ approaches are not explicitly expressed so that governments will be agreeable to addressing health inequity.