Search

Purpose: A lack of data, intervention studies, policies, and targets for nutrition in school-age children (SAC) and adolescents (5-19 years) is hampering progress towards tackling malnutrition. To stimulate and guide further research, this study generated a list of research priorities. Methods: Using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, a list of 48 research questions was compiled and questions were scored against defined criteria using a stakeholder survey. Questions covered all forms of malnutrition, including micronutrient deficiencies, thinness, stunting, overweight/obesity, and suboptimal dietary quality. The context was defined as research focused on SAC and adolescents, 5 to 19 years old, in low-and middle-income countries, that could achieve measurable results in reducing the prevalence of malnutrition in the next 10 years. Results: Between 85 and 101 stakeholders responded per question. Respondents covered a broad geographical distribution across 38 countries, with the largest proportion focusing on work in East and Southern Africa. Of the research questions ranked in the top ten, half focused on delivery strategies for reaching adolescents and half on improving existing interventions. There were few differences in the ranked order of questions between age groups but those related to in-school children and adolescents had higher expert agreement than those for out-of-school adolescents. The top ranked research question focused on tailoring antenatal and postnatal care for pregnant adolescent girls. Conclusion: Nutrition programmes should incorporate implementation research to inform delivery of effective interventions to this age group, starting in schools. Academic research on the development and tailoring of existing nutrition interventions is also needed; specifically, on how to package multisectoral programmes and how to better reach vulnerable and underserved sub- groups, including those out of school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has caused disruptions to the functioning of societies and their health systems. Prior to the pandemic, health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) were particularly stretched and vulnerable. The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) sought to systematically identify priorities for health research that would have the potential to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs. Methods The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method was used to identify COVID-19-related research priorities. All ISoGH members were invited to participate. Seventy-nine experts in clinical, translational, and population research contributed 192 research questions for consideration. Fifty-two experts then scored those questions based on five pre-defined criteria that were selected for this exercise: 1) feasibility and answerability; 2) potential for burden reduction; 3) potential for a paradigm shift; 4) potential for translation and implementation; and 5) impact on equity. Results Among the top 10 research priorities, research questions related to vaccination were prominent: health care system access barriers to equitable uptake of COVID-19 vaccination (ranked 1st), determinants of vaccine hesitancy (4th), development and evaluation of effective interventions to decrease vaccine hesitancy (5th), and vaccination impacts on vulnerable population/s (6th). Health care delivery questions also ranked highly, including: effective strategies to manage COVID-19 globally and in LMICs (2nd) and integrating health care for COVID-19 with other essential health services in LMICs (3rd). Additionally, the assessment of COVID-19 patients' needs in rural areas of LMICs was ranked 7th, and studying the leading socioeconomic determinants and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs using multi-faceted approaches was ranked 8th. The remaining questions in the top 10 were: clarifying paediatric case-fatality rates (CFR) in LMICs and identifying effective strategies for community engagement against COVID-19 in different LMIC contexts. Interpretation Health policy and systems research to inform COVID-19 vaccine uptake and equitable access to care are urgently needed, especially for rural, vulnerable, and/or marginalised populations. This research should occur in parallel with studies that will identify approaches to minimise vaccine hesitancy and effectively integrate care for COVID-19 with other essential health services in LMICs. ISoGH calls on the funders of health research in LMICs to consider the urgency and priority of this research during the COVID-19 pandemic and support studies that could make a positive difference for the populations of LMICs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The private health sector is an important source of sick child care, yet evidence gaps persist in best practices for integrated management of private sector child health services. Further, there is no prioritized research agenda to address these gaps. We used a Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) process to identify priority research questions in response to these evidence gaps. CHNRI is a consultative approach that entails prioritizing research questions by evaluating them against standardized criteria.Methods: We engaged geographically and occupationally diverse experts in the private health sector and child health. Eighty-nine experts agreed to participate and provided 150 priority research questions. We consolidated submitted questions to reduce duplication into a final list of 50. We asked participants to complete an online survey to rank each question against 11 pre-determined criteria in four categories: (i) answerability, (ii) research feasibility, (iii) sustainability/equity, and (iv) importance/potential impact. Statistical data analysis was conducted in SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary NC, USA). We weighted all 11 evaluation criteria equally to calculate the research priority score and average expert agreement for each question. We disaggregated results by location in high-income vs low- and middle-income countries.Results: Forty-nine participants (55.1%) completed the online survey, including 33 high-income and 16 low- and middle-income country respondents. The top, prioritized research question asks whether accreditation or regulation of private clinical and non-clinical sources of care would improve integrated management of childhood illness services. Four of the top ten research priorities were related to adherence to case management protocols. Other top research priorities were related to training and supportive supervision, digital health, and infant and newborn care. Research priorities among high-income and low- and middle-income country respondents were highly correlated.Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic exercise conducted to define research priorities for the management of childhood illness in the private sector. The research priorities put forth in this CHNRI exercise aim to stimulate interest from policy makers, program managers, researchers, and donors to respond to and help close evidence gaps hindering the acceleration of reductions in child mortality through private sector approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction While considerable progress has been made towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and childhood diarrheal diseases have reduced from 4.6 million to 0.8 million over the last three decades, [...]

Background: Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDGs) mobilised countries to reduce child mortality by two thirds the 1990 rate in 2015. While India did not reach MDG 4, it considerably reduced child mortality in the MDG-era. Efficient and targeted interventions and adequate monitoring are necessary to further progress in improvements to child health. Looking forward to the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)-era, the Indian Council of Medical Research and The INCLEN Trust International conducted a national research priority setting exercise for maternal, child, newborn health, and maternal and child nutrition. Here, results are reported for child health.Methods: The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for research priority setting was employed. Research ideas were crowd-sourced from a network of child health experts from across India; these were refined and consolidated into research options (ROs) which were scored against five weighted criteria to arrive weighted Research Priority Scores (wRPS). National and regional priority lists were prepared.Results: 90 experts contributed 596 ideas that were consolidated into 101 research options (ROs). These were scored by 233 experts nationwide. National wRPS for ROs ranged between 0.92 and 0.51. The majority of the top research priorities related to development of cost-effective interventions and their implementation, and impact evaluations, improving data quality; and monitoring of existing programs, or improving the management of morbidities. The research priorities varied between regions, the Economic Action Group and North-Eastern states prioritised questions relating to delivering interventions at community- or household-level, whereas the North-Eastern states and Union Territories prioritised research questions involving managing and measuring malaria, and the Southern and Western states prioritised research questions involving pharmacovigilance of vaccines, impact of newly introduced vaccines, and delivery of vaccines to hard-to-reach populations.Conclusions: Research priorities varied geographically, according the stage of development of the area and mostly pertained to implementation sciences, which was expected given diversity in epidemiological profiles. Priority setting should help guide investment decisions by national and international agencies, therefore encouraging researchers to focus on priority areas. The ICMR has launched a grants programme for implementation research on maternal and child health to pursue research priorities identified by this exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for health research prioritisation relies on stakeholders weighting criteria used to assess research options. These weights in turn impact on the final scores and ranks assigned to research options. Three quarters of CHNRI studies published to date have not involved stakeholders in criteria weighting. Of those that have, few incorporated members of the public into stakeholder groups. Those that have compared different stakeholder groups, such as donors, researchers, or policy makers, showed that different groups place different values upon CHNRI criteria. When choosing the composition of a stakeholder group, it may be important to understand factors that may influence weighting. Drawing upon a group of international public stakeholders, this study explores some of the effects of individual and demographic characteristics has on the weights assigned to the most commonly used CHNRI criteria, with the aim of informing future researchers on avoiding future biases.Methods: Individual and demographic information and 5-point Likert scale responses to questions about the importance of 15 CHNRI criteria were collected from 1031 "Turkers" (Amazon Mechanical Turk workers) via Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT), which is an online crowdsourcing platform. Thirteen of the fifteen criteria were analysed using random-intercept models and the remaining two were analysed through logistic regression.Results: Self-reported health status explained most of the variability in participants' responses across criteria (11/15 criteria), followed by being female (10/15), ethnicity (9/15), employment (8/15), and religion (7/15). Differences across criteria indicate that when choosing stakeholder groups, researchers need to consider these factors to minimise bias.Conclusion: Researchers should collect and report more detailed information from stakeholders, including individual and demographic characteristics, and ensure participation from both genders, multiple ethnicities, religious beliefs, and people with differing health statuses to be transparent regarding possible biases in health research prioritisation. Our analyses indicate that these factors do influence the relative importance of these values, even when the data appears fairly homogeneous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Stakeholder involvement has been described as an indispensable part of health research priority setting. Yet, more than 75% of the exercises using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology have omitted the step involving stakeholders in priority setting. Those that have used stakeholders have rarely used the public, possibly due to the difficulty of assembling and/or accessing a public stakeholder group. In order to strengthen future exercises using the CHNRI methodology, we have used a public stakeholder group to weight 15 CHNRI criteria, and have explored regional differences or being a health stakeholder is influential, and whether the criteria are collapsible.Methods: Using Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT), an online crowdsourcing platform, we collected demographic information and conducted a Likert-scale format survey about the importance of the CHNRI criteria from 1051 stakeholders. The Kruskal-Wallis test, with Dunn's test for posthoc comparisons, was used to examine regional differences and Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to analyse differences between stakeholders with health training/background and stakeholders without a health background and by region. A Factor Analysis (FA) was conducted on the criteria to identify the main domains connecting them. Criteria means were converted to weights.Results: There were regional differences in thirteen of fifteen criteria according to the Kruskal-Wallis test and differences in responses from health stakeholders vs those who were not in eleven of fifteen criteria using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Three components were identified: improve and impact results; implementation and affordability; and, study design and dissemination. A formula is provided to convert means to weights for future studies.Conclusion: In future CHNRI studies, researchers will need to ensure adequate representation from stakeholders to undue bias of CHNRI results. These results should be used in combination with other stakeholder groups, including government, donors, policy makers, and bilateral agencies. Global and regional stakeholder groups scored CHNRI criteria differently; due to this, researchers should consider which group to use in their CHNRI exercises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Crowdsourcing, outsourcing problems and tasks to a crowd, has grown exponentially since the term was coined a decade ago. Being a rapid and inexpensive approach, it is particularly amenable to addressing problems in global health, conflict and humanitarian settings, but its potential has not been systematically assessed. We employed the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative's (CHNRI) method to generate a ranked list of potential uses of crowdsourcing in global health and conflict.Process: 94 experts in global health and crowdsourcing submitted their ideas, and 239 ideas were scored. Each expert scored ideas against three of seven criteria, which were tailored specifically for the exercise. A relative ranking was calculated, along with an Average Expert Agreement (AEA).Findings: On a scale from 0-100, the scores assigned to proposed ideas ranged from 80.39 to 42.01. Most ideas were related to problem solving (n = 112) or data generation (n = 91). Using health care workers to share information about disease outbreaks to ensure global response had the highest score and agreement. Within the top 15, four additional ideas related to containing communicable diseases, two ideas related to using crowdsourcing for vital registration and two to improve maternal and child health. The top conflict ideas related to epidemic responses and various aspects of disease spread. Wisdom of the crowds and machine learning scored low despite being promising in literature.Interpretations: Experts were invited to generate ideas during the Ebola crisis and to score during reports of Zika, which may have affected the scoring. However, crowdsourcing's rapid, inexpensive characteristics make it suitable for addressing epidemics. Given that many ideas reflected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), crowdsourcing may be an innovative solution to achieving some of the SDGs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Crowdsourcing is a nascent phenomenon that has grown exponentially since it was coined in 2006. It involves a large group of people solving a problem or completing a task for an individual or, more commonly, for an organisation. While the field of crowdsourcing has developed more quickly in information technology, it has great promise in health applications. This review examines uses of crowdsourcing in global health and health, broadly.Methods: Semantic searches were run in Google Scholar for "crowdsourcing," "crowdsourcing and health," and similar terms. 996 articles were retrieved and all abstracts were scanned. 285 articles related to health. This review provides a narrative overview of the articles identified.Results: Eight areas where crowdsourcing has been used in health were identified: diagnosis; surveillance; nutrition; public health and environment; education; genetics; psychology; and, general medicine/other. Many studies reported crowdsourcing being used in a diagnostic or surveillance capacity. Crowdsourcing has been widely used across medical disciplines; however, it is important for future work using crowdsourcing to consider the appropriateness of the crowd being used to ensure the crowd is capable and has the adequate knowledge for the task at hand. Gamification of tasks seems to improve accuracy; other innovative methods of analysis including introducing thresholds and measures of trustworthiness should be considered.Conclusion: Crowdsourcing is a new field that has been widely used and is innovative and adaptable. With the exception of surveillance applications that are used in emergency and disaster situations, most uses of crowdsourcing have only been used as pilots. These exceptions demonstrate that it is possible to take crowdsourcing applications to scale. Crowdsourcing has the potential to provide more accessible health care to more communities and individuals rapidly and to lower costs of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This research paper aims to assess factors reported by parents associated with the successful transition of children with complex additional support requirements that have undergone a transition between school environments from 8 European Union member states. Methods: Quantitative data were collected from 306 parents within education systems from 8 EU member states (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain and the UK). The data were derived from an online questionnaire and consisted of 41 questions. Information was collected on: parental involvement in their child’s transition, child involvement in transition, child autonomy, school ethos, professionals’ involvement in transition and integrated working, such as, joint assessment, cooperation and coordination between agencies. Survey questions that were designed on a Likert-scale were included in the Principal Components Analysis (PCA), additional survey questions, along with the results from the PCA, were used to build a logistic regression model. Results: Four principal components were identified accounting for 48.86% of the variability in the data. Principal component 1 (PC1), ‘child inclusive ethos,’ contains 16.17% of the variation. Principal component 2 (PC2), which represents child autonomy and involvement, is responsible for 8.52% of the total variation. Principal component 3 (PC3) contains questions relating to parental involvement and contributed to 12.26% of the overall variation. Principal component 4 (PC4), which involves transition planning and coordination, contributed to 11.91% of the overall variation. Finally, the principal components were included in a logistic regression to evaluate the relationship between inclusion and a successful transition, as well as whether other factors that may have influenced transition. All four principal components were significantly associated with a successful transition, with PC1 being having the most effect (OR: 4.04, CI: 2.43–7.18, p<0.0001). Discussion: To support a child with complex additional support requirements through transition from special school to mainstream, governments and professionals need to ensure children with additional support requirements and their parents are at the centre of all decisions that affect them. It is important that professionals recognise the educational, psychological, social and cultural contexts of a child with additional support requirements and their families which will provide a holistic approach and remove barriers for learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the "Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative") as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences.Methods: We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature.Results: Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low- and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, "low cost", "sustainability", "acceptability", "feasibility", "relevance" and others).Conclusions: The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on "crowd-sourcing". It is inclusive, fostering "ownership" of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health research in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) is often driven by donor priorities rather than by the needs of the countries where the research takes place. This lack of alignment of donor's priorities with local research need may be one of the reasons why countries fail to achieve set goals for population health and nutrition. India has a high burden of morbidity and mortality in women, children and infants. In order to look forward toward the Sustainable Development Goals, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the INCLEN Trust International (INCLEN) employed the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative's (CHNRI) research priority setting method for maternal, neonatal, child health and nutrition with the timeline of 2016-2025. The exercise was the largest to-date use of the CHNRI methodology, both in terms of participants and ideas generated and also expanded on the methodology.Methods: CHNRI is a crowdsourcing-based exercise that involves using the collective intelligence of a group of stakeholders, usually researchers, to generate and score research options against a set of criteria. This paper reports on a large umbrella CHNRI that was divided into four theme-specific CHNRIs (maternal, newborn, child health and nutrition). A National Steering Group oversaw the exercise and four theme-specific Research Sub-Committees technically supported finalizing the scoring criteria and refinement of research ideas for the respective thematic areas. The exercise engaged participants from 256 institutions across India - 4003 research ideas were generated from 498 experts which were consolidated into 373 research options (maternal health: 122; newborn health: 56; child health: 101; nutrition: 94); 893 experts scored these against five criteria (answerability, relevance, equity, innovation and out-of-box thinking, investment on research). Relative weights to the criteria were assigned by 79 members from the Larger Reference Group. Given India's diversity, priorities were identified at national and three regional levels: (i) the Empowered Action Group (EAG) and North-Eastern States; (ii) States and Union territories in Northern India (including West Bengal); and (iii) States and Union territories in Southern and Western parts of India.Conclusions: The exercise leveraged the inherent flexibility of the CHNRI method in multiple ways. It expanded on the CHNRI methodology enabling analyses for identification of research priorities at national and regional levels. However, prioritization of research options are only valuable if they are put to use, and we hope that donors will take advantage of this prioritized list of research options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research on emotional child abuse in sub-Saharan Africa is scarce. Few studies thus far have examined prevalence, risk and protective factors for emotional child abuse or the associations between emotional abuse and girls' health.Methods: A nationally representative two-stage, cluster-sampled, household survey of females aged 13-24 years (n = 1244) on childhood abuse victimisation was conducted. Participants completed interviewer-assisted questionnaires. Associations between emotional abuse and putative risk, and protective factors and health outcomes were analyzed using separate logistic regression models accounting for sampling design. Marginal effects of cumulative risk factors for emotional abuse victimisation were examined.Results: Lifetime prevalence of emotional abuse was 28.5% with 58.3% of these girls reporting many abusive incidents. The most common perpetrators were female (27.8%) and male (16.7%) relatives and, more rarely, biological parents. Risk factors associated with emotional abuse were frequent caregiver changes (odds ratio (OR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.970, poverty (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.12-2.03), and physical abuse (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.45-2.71) and sexual abuse (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.57-3.10) victimisation. Being close to one's mother was a protective factor (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.97). Risk for emotional abuse increased from 13% with no risk factors present to 58.4% -with all four risk factors present. Health outcomes associated with emotional child abuse were suicidal ideation (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.30-2.63) and feeling depressed (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.31-2.71).Conclusions: Girls in Swaziland experience high levels of emotional abuse victimisation. Emotional abuse is associated with economic disadvantage, family factors, other types of abuse victimisation and poor mental health. Therefore, a holistic approach to prevention is needed, incorporating poverty reduction and programmes to improve parent-child relationships, reduce the use of harsh criticism, and change parenting social norms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medication error is a frequent, harmful and costly patient safety incident. Research to date has mostly focused on medication errors in hospitals. In this study, we aimed to identify the main causes of, and solutions to, medication error in primary care. Methods: We used a novel priority-setting method for identifying and ranking patient safety problems and solutions called PRIORITIZE. We invited 500 North West London primary care clinicians to complete an open-ended questionnaire to identify three main problems and solutions relating to medication error in primary care. 113 clinicians submitted responses, which we thematically synthesized into a composite list of 48 distinct problems and 45 solutions. A group of 57 clinicians randomly selected from the initial cohort scored these and an overall ranking was derived. The agreement between the clinicians' scores was presented using the average expert agreement (AEA). The study was conducted between September 2013 and November 2014. Results: The top three problems were incomplete reconciliation of medication during patient 'hand-overs', inadequate patient education about their medication use and poor discharge summaries. The highest ranked solutions included development of a standardized discharge summary template, reduction of unnecessary prescribing, and minimisation of polypharmacy. Overall, better communication between the healthcare provider and patient, quality assurance approaches during medication prescribing and monitoring, and patient education on how to use their medication were considered the top priorities. The highest ranked suggestions received the strongest agreement among the clinicians, i.e. the highest AEA score. Conclusions: Clinicians identified a range of suggestions for better medication management, quality assurance procedures and patient education. According to clinicians, medication errors can be largely prevented with feasible and affordable interventions. PRIORITIZE is a new, convenient, systematic, and replicable method, and merits further exploration with a view to becoming a part of a routine preventative patient safety monitoring mechanism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The CHNRI method for setting health research priorities has crowdsourcing as the major component. It uses the collective opinion of a group of experts to generate, assess and prioritize between many competing health research ideas. It is difficult to compare the accuracy of human individual and collective opinions in predicting uncertain future outcomes before the outcomes are known. However, this limitation does not apply to existing knowledge, which is an important component underlying opinion. In this paper, we report several experiments to explore the quantitative properties of human collective knowledge and discuss their relevance to the CHNRI method.Methods: We conducted a series of experiments in groups of about 160 (range: 122-175) undergraduate Year 2 medical students to compare their collective knowledge to their individual knowledge. We asked them to answer 10 questions on each of the following: (i) an area in which they have a degree of expertise (undergraduate Year 1 medical curriculum); (ii) an area in which they likely have some knowledge (general knowledge); and (iii) an area in which they are not expected to have any knowledge (astronomy). We also presented them with 20 pairs of well-known celebrities and asked them to identify the older person of the pair. In all these experiments our goal was to examine how the collective answer compares to the distribution of students' individual answers.Results: When answering the questions in their own area of expertise, the collective answer (the median) was in the top 20.83% of the most accurate individual responses; in general knowledge, it was in the top 11.93%; and in an area with no expertise, the group answer was in the top 7.02%. However, the collective answer based on mean values fared much worse, ranging from top 75.60% to top 95.91%. Also, when confronted with guessing the older of the two celebrities, the collective response was correct in 18/20 cases (90%), while the 8 most successful individuals among the students had 19/20 correct answers (95%). However, when the system in which the students who were not sure of the correct answer were allowed to either choose an award of half of the point in all such instances, or withdraw from responding, in order to improve the score of the collective, the collective was correct in 19/20 cases (95%), while the 3 most successful individuals were correct in 17/20 cases (85%).Conclusions: Our experiments showed that the collective knowledge of a group with expertise in the subject should always be very close to the true value. In most cases and under most assumption, the collective knowledge will be more accurate than the knowledge of an "average" individual, but there always seems to be a small group of individuals who manage to out-perform the collective. The accuracy of collective prediction may be enhanced by allowing the individuals with low confidence in their answer to withdraw from answering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the use of Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to set transparent and inclusive health research priorities, involving researchers.

The article reports on the use of Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to set transparent and inclusive health research priorities, involving stakeholders.

Aims To systematically identify global research gaps and resource priorities for integrated community case management (iCCM). Methods An iCCM Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) Advisory Group, in collaboration with the Community Case Management Operational Research Group (CCM ORG) identified experts to participate in a CHNRI research priority setting exercise. These experts generated and systematically ranked research questions for iCCM. Research questions were ranked using a "Research Priority Score" (RPS) and the "Average Expert Agreement" (AEA) was calculated for every question. Our groups of experts were comprised of both individuals working in Ministries of Health or Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and individuals working in high-income countries (HICs) in academia or NGO headquarters. A Spearman's Rho was calculated to determine the correlation between the two groups' research questions' ranks. Results The overall RPS ranged from 64.58 to 89.31, with a median score of 81.43. AEA scores ranged from 0.54 to 0.86. Research questions involving increasing the uptake of iCCM services, research questions concerning the motivation, retention, training and supervision of Community Health Workers (CHWs) and concerning adding additional responsibilities including counselling for infant and young child feeding (IYCF) and treatment of severe acute malnutrition (SAM) ranked highly. There was weak to moderate, statistically significant, correlation between scores by representatives of high-income countries and those working in-country or regionally (Spearman's ρ = 0.35034, P < 0.01). Conclusions Operational research to determine optimal training, supervision and modes of motivation and retention for the CHW is vital for improving iCCM, globally, as is research to motivate caregivers to take advantage of iCCM services. Experts working in-country or regionally in LMICs prioritized different research questions than those working in organization headquarters in HICs. Further exploration is needed to determine the nature of this divergence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Globally, moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) affect approximately 52 million children under five. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of interventions for SAM including the World Health Organization (WHO) protocol for inpatient management and community-based management with ready-to-use-therapeutic food (RUTF), as well as interventions for MAM in children under five years in low- and middle-income countries. Methods: We systematically searched the literature and included 14 studies in the meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using CHERG adaptation of GRADE criteria. A Delphi process was undertaken to complement the systematic review in estimating case fatality and recovery rates that were necessary for modelling in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). Results: Case fatality rates for inpatient treatment of SAM using the WHO protocol ranged from 3.4% to 35%. For community-based treatment of SAM, children given RUTF were 51% more likely to achieve nutritional recovery than the standard care group. For the treatment of MAM, children in the RUSF group were significantly more likely to recover and less likely to be non-responders than in the CSB group. In both meta-analyses, weight gain in the intervention group was higher, and although statistically significant, these differences were small. Overall limitations in our analysis include considerable heterogeneity in many outcomes and an inability to evaluate intervention effects separate from commodity effect. The Delphi process indicated that adherence to standardized protocols for the treatment of SAM and MAM should have a marked positive impact on mortality and recovery rates; yet, true consensus was not achieved. Conclusions: Gaps in our ability to estimate effectiveness of overall treatment approaches for SAM and MAM persist. In addition to further impact studies conducted in a wider range of settings, more high quality program evaluations need to be conducted and the results disseminated [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current WHO guidelines on the management and treatment of diarrhea in children strongly recommend continued feeding alongside the administration of oral rehydration solution and zinc therapy, but there remains some debate regarding the optimal diet or dietary ingredients for feeding children with diarrhea. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for all published randomized controlled trials evaluating food-based interventions among children under five years old with diarrhea in low- and middle-income countries. We classified 29 eligible studies into one or more comparisons: reduced versus regular lactose liquid feeds, lactose-free versus lactose-containing liquid feeds, lactose-free liquid feeds versus lactose-containing mixed diets, and commercial/ specialized ingredients versus home-available ingredients. We used all available outcome data to conduct randomeffects meta-analyses to estimate the average effect of each intervention on diarrhea duration, stool output, weight gain and treatment failure risk for studies on acute and persistent diarrhea separately. Results: Evidence of low-to-moderate quality suggests that among children with acute diarrhea, diluting or fermenting lactose-containing liquid feeds does not affect any outcome when compared with an ordinary lactosecontaining liquid feeds. In contrast, moderate quality evidence suggests that lactose-free liquid feeds reduce duration and the risk of treatment failure compared to lactose-containing liquid feeds in acute diarrhea. Only limited evidence of low quality was available to assess either of these two approaches in persistent diarrhea, or to assess lactose-free liquid feeds compared to lactose-containing mixed diets in either acute or persistent diarrhea. For commercially prepared or specialized ingredients compared to home-available ingredients, we found low-tomoderate quality evidence of no effect on any outcome in either acute or persistent diarrhea, though when we restricted these analyses to studies where both intervention and control diets were lactose-free, weight gain in children with acute diarrhea was shown to be greater among those fed with a home-available diet. Conclusions: Among children in low- and middle-income countries, where the dual burden of diarrhea and malnutrition is greatest and where access to proprietary formulas and specialized ingredients is limited, the use of locally available age-appropriate foods should be promoted for the majority of acute diarrhea cases. Lactose intolerance is an important complication in some cases, but even among those children for whom lactose avoidance may be necessary, nutritionally complete diets comprised of locally available ingredients can be used at least as effectively as commercial preparations or specialized ingredients. These same conclusions may also apply to the dietary management of children with persistent diarrhea, but the evidence remains limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Financial incentives are widely used strategies to alleviate poverty, foster development, and improve health. Cash transfer programs, microcredit, user fee removal policies and voucher schemes that provide direct or indirect monetary incentives to households have been used for decades in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and more recently in Southeast Asia. Until now, no systematic review of the impact of financial incentives on coverage and uptake of health interventions targeting children under 5 years of age has been conducted. The objective of this review is to provide estimates on the effect of six types of financial incentive programs: (i) Unconditional cash transfers (CT), (ii) Conditional cash transfers (CCT), (iii) Microcredit (MC), (iv) Conditional Microcredit (CMC), (v) Voucher schemes (VS) and (vi) User fee removal (UFR) on the uptake and coverage of health interventions targeting children under the age of five years. Methods: We conducted systematic searches of a series of databases until September 1st, 2012, to identify relevant studies reporting on the impact of financial incentives on coverage of health interventions and behaviors targeting children under 5 years of age. The quality of the studies was assessed using the CHERG criteria. Metaanalyses were undertaken to estimate the effect when multiple studies meeting our inclusion criteria were available. Results: Our searches resulted in 1671 titles identified 25 studies reporting on the impact of financial incentive programs on 5 groups of coverage indicators: breastfeeding practices (breastfeeding incidence, proportion of children receiving colostrum and early initiation of breastfeeding, exclusive breastfeeding for six months and duration of breastfeeding); vaccination (coverage of full immunization, partial immunization and specific antigens); health care use (seeking healthcare when child was ill, visits to health facilities for preventive reasons, visits to health facilities for any reason, visits for health check-up including growth control); management of diarrhoeal disease (ORS use during diarrhea episode, continued feeding during diarrhea, healthcare during diarrhea episode) and other preventive health interventions (iron supplementation, vitamin A, zinc supplementation, preventive deworming). The quality of evidence on the effect of financial incentives on breastfeeding practices was low but seems to indicate a potential positive impact on receiving colostrum, early initiation of breastfeeding, exclusive breastfeeding and mean duration of exclusive breastfeeding. There is no effect of financial incentives on immunization coverage although there was moderate quality evidence of conditional cash transfers leading to a small but non-significant increase in coverage of age-appropriate immunization. There was low quality evidence of impact of CCT on healthcare use by children under age 5 (Risk difference: 0.14 [95%CI: 0.03; 0.26]) as well as low quality evidence of an effect of user fee removal on use of curative health services (RD=0.62 [0.41; 0.82]). Conclusions: Financial incentives may have potential to promote increased coverage of several important child health interventions, but the quality of evidence available is low. The more pronounced effects seem to be achieved by programs that directly removed user fees for access to health services. Some indication of effect were also observed for programs that conditioned financial incentives on participation in health education and attendance to health care visits. This finding suggest that the measured effect may be less a consequence of the financial incentive and more due to conditionalities addressing important informational barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Childhood diarrhoea remains a major public health problem responsible for the deaths of approximately 800 000 children annually, worldwide. The present study was undertaken to further define research priorities for the prevention and treatment of diarrhoea in low and middle income countries. We used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) process for defining research priorities. This provided a transparent, systematic method of obtaining the opinions of experts regarding research priorities in childhood diarrhoea. The present report describes the deliberations of a workshop that reviewed these research priorities by stakeholders including colleagues from: government agencies, academic institutions, major funding agencies and non-governmental organizations. Methods The workshop included 38 participants, divided into four groups to consider issues in the categories of description, delivery, development and discovery. Each group received 20 to 23 questions/ research priorities previously identified by the CHNRI process. Deliberations and conclusions of each group were summarized in separate reports that were further discussed in a plenary session including all workshop participants. Results The reports of the working groups emphasized the following five key points: 1) A common theme was the need to substantially increase the use of oral rehydration salts (ORS) and zinc in the prevention and treatment of diarrhoea. There is a need for better definitions of those factors that supported and interfered with the use of these agents; 2) There is an urgent need to determine the long-term effects of chronic and recurrent bouts of diarrhoea on the physical and intellectual development of affected children; 3) Improvements in water, sanitation and hygiene facilities are critical steps required to reduce the incidence and severity of childhood diarrhoea; 4)Risk factors enhancing the susceptibility and clinical response to diarrhoea were explored; implementation research of modifiable factors is urgently required; 5) More research is required to better understand the causes and pathophysiology of various forms of enteropathy and to define the methods and techniques necessary for their accurate study. Conclusions The participants in this workshop determined that use of the CHNRI process had successfully defined those research priorities necessary for the study of childhood diarrhoea. The deliberations of the workshop brought these research priorities to the attention of stakeholders responsible for the implementation of the recommendations. It was concluded that the deliberations of the workshop positively supplemented the research priorities developed by the CHNRI process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the authors focus on emerging interventions for childhood diarrhoea. They inform that researcher M. Kosek and co-workers have used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology in order to define research priorities for the disease is combination vaccine for Cryptosporidium, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli and Shigella. They mention that researchers have expressed less priority towards prevention of environmental enteropathy.

This paper reports on qualitative findings from the larger Safe Schools Longitudinal Study and explores what trainee teachers understand by the term 'bullying', its prevalence, and the barriers to responding to it. Twenty-four teacher trainees at an Initial Teacher Education programme in Scotland took part in two waves of qualitative interviews three years apart. Findings show trainee teachers use the term 'bullying' to cover a range of behaviours - with uncertainty around whether verbal insults are bullying. Key factors that impact teacher responses are discussed - with the attitude of the head teacher being pivotal to school climate. • Trainee teachers have a limited vocabulary for describing peer victimisation. • Verbal insults are less likely to be defined as 'bullying' by trainee teachers. • Trainee teachers feel university training inadequately prepares them for addressing peer victimisation. • Trainee teachers undertaking placements in schools emphasising anti-bullying felt more supported and confident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In this priority-setting exercise, we sought to identify leading research priorities needed for strengthening future pandemic preparedness and response across countries., Methods: The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to identify research priorities for future pandemic preparedness. Eighty experts in global health, translational and clinical research identified 163 research ideas, of which 42 experts then scored based on five pre-defined criteria. We calculated intermediate criterion-specific scores and overall research priority scores from the mean of individual scores for each research idea. We used a bootstrap (n = 1000) to compute the 95% confidence intervals., Results: Key priorities included strengthening health systems, rapid vaccine and treatment production, improving international cooperation, and enhancing surveillance efficiency. Other priorities included learning from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, managing supply chains, identifying planning gaps, and promoting equitable interventions. We compared this CHNRI-based outcome with the 14 research priorities generated and ranked by ChatGPT, encountering both striking similarities and clear differences., Conclusions: Priority setting processes based on human crowdsourcing - such as the CHNRI method - and the output provided by ChatGPT are both valuable, as they complement and strengthen each other. The priorities identified by ChatGPT were more grounded in theory, while those identified by CHNRI were guided by recent practical experiences. Addressing these priorities, along with improvements in health planning, equitable community-based interventions, and the capacity of primary health care, is vital for better pandemic preparedness and response in many settings., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and declare the following activities and/or relationships: IR is the Co-Editor in Chief, PS is the China Regional Editor, and DA is an Editorial Board Member of the Journal of Global Health. To ensure that any possible conflict of interest relevant to the journal has been addressed, this article was reviewed according to best practice guidelines of international editorial organisations., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Background: Africa will miss the maternal and neonatal health (MNH) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets if the current trajectory is followed. The African Academy of Sciences has formed an expert maternal and newborn health group to discuss actions to improve MNH SDG targets. The team, among other recommendations, chose to implement an MNH research prioritization exercise for Africa covering four grand challenge areas. Methods:  The team used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) research prioritization method to identify research priorities in maternal and newborn health in Africa. From 609 research options, a ranking of the top 46 research questions was achieved. Research priority scores and agreement statistics were calculated, with sub-analysis possible for the regions of East Africa, West Africa and those living out of the continent.  Results: The top research priorities generally fell into (i) improving identification of high-risk mothers and newborns, or diagnosis of high-risk conditions in mothers and newborns to improve health outcomes; (ii) improving access to treatment through improving incentives to attract and retain skilled health workers in remote, rural areas, improving emergency transport, and assessing health systems' readiness; and (iii) improving uptake of proven existing interventions such as Kangaroo Mother Care. Conclusions: The research priorities emphasized building interventions that improved access to quality healthcare in the lowest possible units of the provision of MNH interventions. The lists prioritized participation of communities in delivering MNH interventions. The current burden of disease from MNCH in Africa aligns well with the list of priorities listed from this exercise but provides extra insights into current needs by African practitioners. The MNCH Africa expert group believes that the recommendations from this work should be implemented by multisectoral teams as soon as possible to provide adequate lead time for results of the succeeding programmes to be seen before 2030., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KW is employed by a co-financer of large scale maternal and child nutrition programmes that operates in Africa. MA, JL, CM, CA, CE, EM, MT, PO, AM and TK have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 Alobo M et al.)