Explore the vast range of titles available.

The legacy of male bias within pharmaceutical research, regulation, and commercialisation needs to be rectified, argue Sundari Ravindran and colleagues

Michelle Remme and colleagues argue that if costs to users are considered and their financing is right, self care interventions for sexual and reproductive health can improve equity and efficiency

Background Addressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors’ shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility. Aim This study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers. Methods We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded. Results Of 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently reported with some evidence suggesting co-financing contributed to improved outcomes. Conclusion Co-financing remains in an exploratory phase, with diverse models having been implemented across sectors and settings. By incentivising intersectoral action on structural inequities and barriers to health interventions, such a novel financing mechanism could contribute to more effective engagement of non-health sectors; to efficiency gains in the financing of universal health coverage; and to simultaneously achieving health and other well-being related sustainable development goals.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic and response severely impacted people living with non-communicable diseases (PLWNCDs) globally. It exacerbated pre-existing health inequalities, severely disrupted access to care, and worsened clinical outcomes for PLWNCDs, who were at higher risk of morbidity and mortality from the virus. The pandemic’s effects were likely magnified in humanitarian settings, where there were pre-existing gaps in continuity of care for non-communicable diseases (NCDs). We sought to explore factors affecting implementation of NCD care in crisis settings during the COVID-19 pandemic and the adaptations made to support implementation. Methods Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we undertook an online survey of 98 humanitarian actors from multiple regions and organization types (March-July 2021), followed by in-depth interviews with 13 purposively selected survey respondents (October-December 2021) . Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics, while interview data were analysed thematically, using both deductive and inductive approaches. Results Initially, humanitarian actors faced challenges influenced by external actors’ priorities, such as de-prioritisation of NCD care by governments, travel restrictions and supply chain interruptions. With each infection wave and lockdown, humanitarian actors were better able to adapt and maintain NCD services. The availability of COVID-19 vaccines was a positive turning point, especially for the risk management of people with NCDs and protection of health workers. Key findings include that, despite pre-existing challenges, humanitarian actors largely continued NCD services during the crisis. Enabling factors that supported continuity of NCD services included the ability to quickly pivot to remote means of communication with PLWNCDs, flexibility in medicine dispensing, and successful advocacy to prioritize NCD management within health systems. Key lessons learned included the importance of partnerships and cooperation with other health actors, and the mobilisation or repurposing of community health workers/volunteer networks. Conclusions The COVID-19 experience should prompt national and global health stakeholders to strengthen inclusion of NCDs in emergency preparedness, response, and resilience planning. Key lessons were learned around remote care provision, including adapting to NCD severity, integrating community health workers, providing context-adapted patient information, combating misinformation, and strengthening cross-sectoral partnerships.

Patients with multiple sclerosis tend to report higher levels of work difficulties and negative outcomes, such as voluntary and involuntary work termination and reduced work participation. In this article, we discuss the complex interactions of disease, personal coping strategies, and social and structural factors that contribute to their work experiences and outcomes. An overview of the coping strategies and actions that leverage personal and context-level factors and dynamics is also provided to support the overall goal of continued work in patients with MS.

Background Achieving equitable healthcare access for persons with disabilities is vital, as they often face various barriers that impact their health and well-being. Recognizing the importance of gender equity, this study aims to explore the specific barriers faced by women and girls with disabilities in accessing quality healthcare services in Lebanon. Methods A mixed-method sequential explanatory approach was employed. Initially, a retrospective descriptive study analyzed data from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)-supported physical rehabilitation programme (PRP) database. Subsequently, in-depth interviews were conducted to delve into factors influencing gender-disproportionate service users and to uncover barriers to accessing healthcare. Levesque et al.‘s ‘Conceptual framework on healthcare access’ was used to organize and map the results. Results The quantitative analysis of service utilization at ICRC PRP centers from 2015 to 2022 revealed significant gender disparities, with males comprising 66.6% of service users compared to 33.4% females. This trend was consistent across age categories, nationalities, and clinical conditions. Healthcare access for women and girls with disabilities was found to be inadequate across all five dimensions of the Levesque framework: adequacy, accessibility, affordability, appropriateness, and availability, as well as their corresponding abilities. While certain challenges such as transportation, financial constraints, inadequate infrastructure, and limited information on available services were common to both genders, gender-specific barriers primarily included societal norms, safety concerns during unaccompanied visits to healthcare facilities, limited access to societal information, economic disparities, preferences for female healthcare providers, and the need for privacy during consultations. Conclusion This study underscores key barriers hindering healthcare access for women and girls with disabilities in Lebanon, necessitating tailored interventions. Gender-specific challenges, including societal norms and safety concerns, require targeted solutions for improved access and outcomes. This study serves as a call to action for stakeholders at various levels to collaborate and implement concrete measures to bridge the gap in healthcare access and ensure that no one is left behind.

While the acute and collective crisis from the pandemic is over, an estimated 2.5 million people died from COVID-19 in 2022, tens of millions suffer from long COVID and national economies still reel from multiple deprivations exacerbated by the pandemic. Sex and gender biases deeply mark these evolving experiences of COVID-19, impacting the quality of science and effectiveness of the responses deployed. To galvanise change by strengthening evidence-informed inclusion of sex and gender in COVID-19 practice, we led a virtual collaboration to articulate and prioritise gender and COVID-19 research needs. In addition to standard prioritisation surveys, feminist principles mindful of intersectional power dynamics underpinned how we reviewed research gaps, framed research questions and discussed emergent findings. The collaborative research agenda-setting exercise engaged over 900 participants primarily from low/middle-income countries in varied activities. The top 21 research questions included the importance of the needs of pregnant and lactating women and information systems that enable sex-disaggregated analysis. Gender and intersectional aspects to improving vaccine uptake, access to health services, measures against gender-based violence and integrating gender in health systems were also prioritised. These priorities are shaped by more inclusive ways of working, which are critical for global health as it faces further uncertainties in the aftermath of COVID-19. It remains imperative to address the basics in gender and health (sex-disaggregated data and sex-specific needs) and also advance transformational goals to advance gender justice across health and social policies, including those related to global research.

Individuals with multiple sclerosis have a tendency to make early decisions for work change, even in reversible, episodic, or mild disease stages. To better understand how a multiple sclerosis (MS) diagnosis influences perceptions of work and motivations for work changes, we conducted a hermeneutic phenomenology study to explore the work lives of ten individuals with MS in Malaysia. The interpretive analysis and cumulative narratives depict an overarching change in their concept of ideal work and life aspirations and how participants make preemptive work changes to manage illness-work-life futures in subjectively meaningful ways. Discussions on their integrated pursuit of finding dynamic and subjective illness-work-life balance include reconciling the problem of hard work and stress on disease activity and progress, making positive lifestyle changes as health management behaviour, and the motivational influence of their own life and family roles: the consideration of their spouses, parents, and children. At an action level, work change was seen as moral and necessary for the management of illness futures. Our findings contribute insights on how individual perceptions and holistic life management decisions contribute to on-going and disrupted work trajectories, which can inform practice and policy on early interventions to support continued employment.