Search

In 2020 COVID-19 led to an unprecedented stream of papers being submitted to journals. Scientists and physicians all around the globe were in need for information about this new disease. In this climate, many articles were accepted after extremely fast peer-reviews to provide the scientific community with the latest discoveries and knowledge. Unfortunately, this also led to articles retraction due to authors' misconduct or errors in methodology and/or conclusions. The aim of this study is to investigate the number and characteristics of retracted papers, and to explore the main causes that led to retraction. We conducted a systematic review on retracted articles, using PubMed as data source. Our inclusion criteria were the following: English-language retracted articles that reported original data, results, opinions or hypotheses on COVID-19 and Sars-CoV-2. Twenty-seven retracted articles were identified, mainly reporting observational studies and opinion pieces. Many articles published during the first year of the pandemic have been retracted, mainly due to the authors' scientific misconduct. Duplications, plagiarism, frauds and absence of consent, were the main reasons for retractions. In modern medicine, researchers are required to publish frequently, and, especially during situations like the COVID-19 pandemic, when articles were rapidly published, gaps in peer-reviews system and in the path to scientific publication arose.

Background Patient referral is a process in which a healthcare provider decides to seek assistance due to the limitations of available skills, resources and services offered locally. Paper-based referrals predominantly used in low-income countries hardly follow any procedure. This causes a major gap in communication, coordination, and continuity of care between primary and specialized levels, leading to poor access, delay, duplication and unnecessary costs. The goal of this study is to assess the formats and completeness of existing paper-based referral letters in order to improve health information exchange, coordination, and continuity of care. Methods A retrospective exploratory research was conducted in eight public and three private healthcare facilities in the city of Kigali from May to October 2021. A purposive sampling method was used to select hospitals and referral letters from patients’ files. A data capture sheet was designed according to the contents of the referral letters and the resulting responses were analyzed descriptively. Results In public hospitals, five types of updated referral letters were available, in total agreement with World Health Organization (WHO) standards of which two (neonatal transfer form and patient monitoring transfer form) were not used. There was also one old format that was used by most hospitals and another format designed and used by a district hospital (DH) separately. Three formats were designed and used by private hospitals (PH) individually. A total of 2,304 referral letters were perused and the results show that “external transfer” forms were completed at 58.8%; “antenatal, delivery, and postnatal external transfer” forms at 47.5%; “internal transfer” forms at 46.6%; “Referral/counter referral” forms at 46.0%; district hospital referrals (DH2) at 73.4%. Referrals by private hospitals (PH1, PH2 and PH3) were completed at 97.7%, 70.7%, and 0.0% respectively. The major completeness deficit was observed in counter referral information for all hospitals. Conclusion We observed inconsistencies in the format of the available referral letters used by public hospitals, moreover some of them were incompatible with WHO standards. Additionally, there were deficits in the completeness of all types of paper-based referral letters in use. There is a need for standardization and to disseminate the national patient referral guideline in public hospitals with emphasis on referral feedback, referral registry, triage, archiving and a need for regular training in all organizations.

It is commonly hypothesized that scientists are more likely to engage in data falsification and fabrication when they are subject to pressures to publish, when they are not restrained by forms of social control, when they work in countries lacking policies to tackle scientific misconduct, and when they are male. Evidence to test these hypotheses, however, is inconclusive due to the difficulties of obtaining unbiased data. Here we report a pre-registered test of these four hypotheses, conducted on papers that were identified in a previous study as containing problematic image duplications through a systematic screening of the journal PLoS ONE. Image duplications were classified into three categories based on their complexity, with category 1 being most likely to reflect unintentional error and category 3 being most likely to reflect intentional fabrication. We tested multiple parameters connected to the hypotheses above with a matched-control paradigm, by collecting two controls for each paper containing duplications. Category 1 duplications were mostly not associated with any of the parameters tested, as was predicted based on the assumption that these duplications were mostly not due to misconduct. Categories 2 and 3, however, exhibited numerous statistically significant associations. Results of univariable and multivariable analyses support the hypotheses that academic culture, peer control, cash-based publication incentives and national misconduct policies might affect scientific integrity. No clear support was found for the “pressures to publish” hypothesis. Female authors were found to be equally likely to publish duplicated images compared to males. Country-level parameters generally exhibited stronger effects than individual-level parameters, because developing countries were significantly more likely to produce problematic image duplications. This suggests that promoting good research practices in all countries should be a priority for the international research integrity agenda. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11948-018-0023-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Rapid reviews have emerged as an approach to provide contextualized evidence in a timely and efficient manner. Three rapid review centers were established in Ethiopia, Lebanon, and South Africa through the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, to stimulate demand, engage policymakers, and produce rapid reviews to support health policy and systems decision-making. This study aimed to assess the experiences of researchers and policymakers engaged in producing and using rapid reviews for health systems strengthening and decisions towards universal health coverage (UHC). Methods Using a case study approach with qualitative research methods, experienced researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with respondents from each center (n = 16). The topics covered included the process and experience of establishing the centers, stimulating demand for rapid reviews, collaborating between researchers and policymakers, and disseminating and using rapid reviews for health policies and interventions and the potential for sustaining and institutionalizing the services. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Major themes interacted and contributed to shape the experiences of stakeholders of the rapid review centers, including the following: organizational structural arrangements of the centers, management of their processes as input factors, and the rapid reviews as the immediate policy-relevant outputs. The engagement process and the rapid review products contributed to a final theme of impact of the rapid review centers in relation to the uptake of evidence for policy and systems decision-making. Conclusions The experiences of policymakers and researchers of the rapid review centers determined the uptake of evidence. The findings of this study can inform policymakers, health system managers, and researchers on best practices for demanding, developing and using rapid reviews to support decision- and policymaking, and implementing the universal healthcare coverage agenda.

Background There is a need for easily accessible tuberculosis unit cost data, as well as an understanding of the variability of methods used and reporting standards of that data. Objective The aim of this systematic review was to descriptively review papers reporting tuberculosis unit costs from a healthcare provider perspective looking at methodological variation; to assess quality using a study quality rating system and machine learning to investigate the indicators of reporting quality; and to identify the data gaps to inform standardised tuberculosis unit cost collection and consistent principles for reporting going forward. Methods We searched grey and published literature in five sources and eight databases, respectively, using search terms linked to cost, tuberculosis and tuberculosis health services including tuberculosis treatment and prevention. For inclusion, the papers needed to contain empirical unit cost estimates for tuberculosis interventions from low- and middle-income countries, with reference years between 1990 and 2018. A total of 21,691 papers were found and screened in a phased manner. Data were extracted from the eligible papers into a detailed Microsoft Excel tool, extensively cleaned and analysed with R software (R Project, Vienna, Austria) using the user interface of RStudio. A study quality rating was applied to the reviewed papers based on the inclusion or omission of a selection of variables and their relative importance. Following this, machine learning using a recursive partitioning method was utilised to construct a classification tree to assess the reporting quality. Results This systematic review included 103 provider perspective papers with 627 unit costs (costs not presented here) for tuberculosis interventions among a total of 140 variables. The interventions covered were active, passive and intensified case finding; tuberculosis treatment; above-service costs; and tuberculosis prevention. Passive case finding is the detection of tuberculosis cases where individuals self-identify at health facilities; active case finding is detection of cases of those not in health facilities, such as through outreach; and intensified case finding is detection of cases in high-risk populations. There was heterogeneity in some of the reported methods used such cost allocation, amortisation and the use of top-down, bottom-up or mixed approaches to the costing. Uncertainty checking through sensitivity analysis was only reported on by half of the papers (54%), while purposive and convenience sampling was reported by 72% of papers. Machine learning indicated that reporting on ‘Intervention’ (in particular), ‘Urbanicity’ and ‘Site Sampling’, were the most likely indicators of quality of reporting. The largest data gap identified was for tuberculosis vaccination cost data, the Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccine in particular. There is a gap in available unit costs for 12 of 30 high tuberculosis burden countries, as well as for the interventions of above-service costs, tuberculosis prevention, and active and intensified case finding. Conclusion Variability in the methods and reporting used makes comparison difficult and makes it hard for decision makers to know which unit costs they can trust. The study quality rating system used in this review as well as the classification tree enable focus on specific reporting aspects that should improve variability and increase confidence in unit costs. Researchers should endeavour to be explicit and transparent in how they cost interventions following the principles as laid out in the Global Health Cost Consortium’s Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions, which in turn will lead to repeatability, comparability and enhanced learning from others.

Despite the increasing number of potential biomarkers identified in laboratories and reported in much literature, the adoption of biomarkers routinely available in clinical practice to inform treatment decisions is very limited. Reimbursement decisions for new health technologies are often informed by economic evaluations; however, economic evaluations of diagnostics/testing technologies, such as companion biomarker tests, are far less frequently reported than drugs. Furthermore, few countries provide the health economic evaluation methods guide specific to co-dependent technologies such as companion diagnostics or precision medicines. Therefore, this paper aims to guide the process of the development of cost-effectiveness models of cancer biomarkers for targeted therapies, focusing on companion diagnostics. This tutorial paper provides practical guidance on how to conduct economic evaluations of cancer biomarkers and how to model the characteristics of the biomarker tests as part of the value for money of corresponding targeted therapies. This paper presents a brief introduction to the methods and data requirements, a step-by-step guide to constructing a health economic model of companion cancer biomarkers, and a discussion of issues that arise in their application to healthcare decision making. This practical guidance is provided in R, and worked examples are provided in this paper with R codes in the accompanying electronic supplementary material. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40273-021-01069-8.

BackgroundHealth information systems are crucial to provide data for decision-making and demand for data is constantly growing. However, the link between data and decisions is not always rational or linear and the management of data ends up overloading frontline health workers, which may compromise quality of healthcare delivery. Despite limited evidence, there is an increasing push for the digitalization of health information systems, which poses enormous challenges, particularly in remote, rural settings in low- and middle-income countries. Paper-based tools will continue to be used in combination with digital solutions and this calls for efforts to make them more responsive to local needs. Paper-based Health Information Systems in Comprehensive Care (PHISICC) is a transdisciplinary, multi-country research initiative to create and test innovative paper-based health information systems in three sub-Saharan African countries.Methods/DesignThe PHISICC initiative is being carried out in remote, rural settings in Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria through partnership with ministries of health and research institutions. We began with research syntheses to acquire the most up-to-date knowledge on health information systems. These were coupled with fieldwork in the three countries to understand the current design, patterns and contexts of use, and healthcare worker perspectives. Frontline health workers, with designers and researchers, used co-creation methods to produce the new PHISICC tools. This suite of tools is being tested in the three countries in three cluster-randomized controlled trials. Throughout the project, we have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders and have maintained the highest scientific standards to ensure that results are relevant to the realities in the three countries.DiscussionWe have deployed a comprehensive research approach to ensure the robustness and future policy uptake of findings. Besides the innovative PHISICC paper-based tools, our process is in itself innovative. Rather than emphasizing the technical dimensions of data management, we focused instead on frontline health workers’ data use and decision-making. By tackling the whole scope of primary healthcare areas rather than a subset of them, we have developed an entirely new design and visual language for a suite of tools across healthcare areas. The initiative is being tested in remote, rural areas where the most vulnerable live.

Background A robust medical claims review system is crucial for addressing fraud and abuse and ensuring financial viability of health insurance organisations. This paper assesses claims adjustment rate of the paper- and electronic-based claims reviews of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in Ghana. Methods The study was a cross-sectional comparative assessment of paper- and electronic-based claims reviews of the NHIS. Medical claims of subscribers for the year, 2014 were requested from the claims directorate and analysed. Proportions of claims adjusted by the paper- and electronic-based claims reviews were determined for each type of healthcare facility. Bivariate analyses were also conducted to test for differences in claims adjustments between healthcare facility types, and between the two claims reviews. Results The electronic-based review made overall adjustment of 17.0% from GHS10.09 million (USD2.64 m) claims cost whilst the paper-based review adjusted 4.9% from a total of GHS57.50 million (USD15.09 m) claims cost received, and the difference was significant (p

Mumps, despite being a widely prevalent disease in the country, is considered as an insignificant public health problem mainly because of poor documentation of clinical cases and lack of published studies. In the absence of adequate published data on disease burden, Government of India has recently decided to introduce measles-rubella (MR) vaccine in its National Immunization Program and neglected mumps component.Following an IAP ACVIP meeting on December 6 and 7, 2014, a detailed review of burden of mumps in India along with vaccination strategies to control the disease was prepared. The draft was circulated amongst the members of the committee for review and approval. Revised final draft was later approved by IAP executive board in January 2015.To provide a review of community burden of mumps in India; and to discuss the vaccination strategies to impress upon policymakers to include mumps vaccination in National immunization program.A total of 14 studies and two media reports on mumps outbreak were retrieved. The outbreaks were reported from all the regions of the country. Mumps meningoencephalitis was responsible for 2.3% to 14.6% of all investigated hospitalized acute encephalitis syndrome or viral encephalitis cases in different studies. Data from Infectious Disease Surveillance (ID Surv) portal of IAP and Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) of Government of India (GoI) were also reviewed. While a total of 1052 cases were reported by the IDSurv, IDSP had investigated 72 outbreaks with 1564 cases in 14 states during different time periods. Genotypes G (subtype G2) and C were found to be main genotypes of the mumps virus circulating in the country. Three studies studied serological status of young children and adolescents against mumps, and found susceptibility rates ranging from 32% to 80% in different age groups.Mumps poses a significant disease burden in India. This calls for inclusion of mumps vaccine in the National immunization program.

Background Social support services such as day care centres are important in post-diagnostic dementia care to enable people living with dementia stay at home for longer. Little research has addressed potential inequalities in access, with no research on variations before and since COVID-19. The aim of this study was to explore inequalities in social support service usage before and since the pandemic. Methods Unpaid carers and people living with dementia were interviewed over the phone about their experiences of accessing social support services before and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Transcripts were analysed for key themes using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Results Fifty participants (42 unpaid carers; eight people living with dementia) were interviewed, and five themes identified: (1) Service issues; (2) Access issues; (3) Relying on own initiative; (4) New inequalities due to COVID-19; and (5) Missing out on the benefits of support services. Participants reported transport, finances, and location as factors reducing their ability to access support service pre-COVID, with inequalities remaining and at times exacerbated since. Carers and people living with dementia also reported struggling with accessing basic necessities during COVID, including food and medicines. Conclusions Considering the benefits of accessing support services, resourced procedures and facilities are needed to maintain access to support services with more accessible remote support provision, enabling people from all backgrounds to access the care they need.

Research co-production is about doing research with those who use it. This approach to research has been receiving increasing attention from research funders, academic institutions, researchers and even the public as a means of optimising the relevance, usefulness, usability and use of research findings, which together, the argument goes, produces greater and more timely impact. The papers in this cross BMC journal collection raise issues about research co-production that, to date, have not been fully considered and suggest areas for future research for advancing the science and practice of research co-production. These papers address some gaps in the literature, make connections between subfields and provide varied perspectives from researchers and knowledge users.

This paper concerns the responsibility of co-authors in cases of scientific misconduct. Arguments in research integrity guidelines and in the bioethics literature concerning authorship responsibilities are discussed. It is argued that it is unreasonable to claim that for every case where a research paper is found to be fraudulent, each author is morally responsible for all aspects of that paper, or that one particular author has such a responsibility. It is further argued that it is more constructive to specify what task responsibilities come with different roles in a project and describe what kinds of situations or events call for some kind of action, and what the appropriate actions might be.

In their letter to the Editor in this issue, Kolstoe and Carpenter challenge a core aspect of our recently published case study of research approvals [BMC Medical Ethics 20:7] by arguing that we conflate research ethics with governance and funding processes. Amongst the key concerns of the authors are: 1) that our paper exemplifies a typical conflation of concepts such as governance, integrity and ethics, with significant consequences for claims around the responsibility and accountability of the organisations involved; 2) that, as a consequence of this conflation, we misrepresent the ethics review process, including in fundamental aspects such as the ethics approval-opinion distinction; 3) that it is difficult to see scope for greater integration of processes such as applying for funding, research approvals, Patient and Public Involvement, etc., as suggested by us. Here we present an alternative point of view towards the concerns raised.

Background This is the third in a series of three papers describing the use of qualitative evidence syntheses (QES) to inform the development of clinical and health systems guidelines. WHO has recognised the need to improve its guideline methodology to ensure that decision-making processes are transparent and evidence based, and that the resulting recommendations are relevant and applicable to end users. In addition to the standard data on effectiveness, WHO guidelines increasingly use evidence derived from QES to provide information on acceptability and feasibility and to develop important implementation considerations. Methods WHO convened a group drawn from the technical teams involved in formulating recent (2010–2018) guidelines employing QES. Using a pragmatic and iterative approach that included feedback from WHO staff and other stakeholders, the group reflected on, discussed and identified key methods and research implications from designing QES and using the resulting findings in guideline development. As members of WHO guideline technical teams, our aim in this paper is to explore how we have used findings from QES to develop implementation considerations for these guidelines. Results For each guideline, in addition to using systematic reviews of effectiveness, the technical teams used QES to gather evidence of the acceptability and feasibility of interventions and, in some cases, equity issues and the value people place on different outcomes. This evidence was synthesised using standardised processes. The teams then used the QES to identify implementation considerations combined with other sources of information and input from experts. Conclusions QES were useful sources of information for implementation considerations. However, several issues for further development remain, including whether researchers should use existing health systems frameworks when developing implementation considerations; whether researchers should take confidence in the evidence into account when developing implementation considerations; whether qualitative evidence that reveals implementation challenges should lead guideline panels to make conditional recommendations or only point to implementation considerations; and whether guideline users find it helpful to have challenges pointed out to them or whether they also need solutions. Finally, we need to explore how QES findings can be incorporated into derivative products to aid implementation.

Background For disease surveillance, manual data collection using paper-based questionnaires can be time consuming and prone to errors. We introduced smartphone data collection to replace paper-based data collection for an influenza sentinel surveillance system in four hospitals in Kenya. We compared the quality, cost and timeliness of data collection between the smartphone data collection system and the paper-based system. Methods Since 2006, the Kenya Ministry of Health (MoH) with technical support from the Kenya Medical Research Institute/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KEMRI/CDC) conducted hospital-based sentinel surveillance for influenza in Kenya. In May 2011, the MOH replaced paper-based collection with an electronic data collection system using Field Adapted Survey Toolkit (FAST) on HTC Touch Pro2 smartphones at four sentinel sites. We compared 880 paper-based questionnaires dated Jan 2010-Jun 2011 and 880 smartphone questionnaires dated May 2011-Jun 2012 from the four surveillance sites. For each site, we compared the quality, cost and timeliness of each data collection system. Results Incomplete records were more likely seen in data collected using pen-and-paper compared to data collected using smartphones (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 7, 95% CI: 4.4-10.3). Errors and inconsistent answers were also more likely to be seen in data collected using pen-and-paper compared to data collected using smartphones (aIRR: 25, 95% CI: 12.5-51.8). Smartphone data was uploaded into the database in a median time of 7 days while paper-based data took a median of 21 days to be entered (p

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the major morbidity and health economic factors in Europe and often associated with several co-morbidities. This paper (1) underlines the importance of highly professional AF management utilising a multi-disciplinary expertise, especially considering the role of AF regarding the stroke risk and prevention, (2) demonstrates the consolidated position of CVD professionals and (3) emphasises those research aspects that could deepen the understanding of the emergence and the treatment of AF and therefore helps to provide a personalised preventive and more effective management of AF. Specialised calls are considered for that within the new European Programme 'Horizon 2020'.

Background The GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach has been developed by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group. The approach has been developed to support the use of findings from qualitative evidence syntheses in decision making, including guideline development and policy formulation. CERQual includes four components for assessing how much confidence to place in findings from reviews of qualitative research (also referred to as qualitative evidence syntheses): (1) methodological limitations, (2) coherence, (3) adequacy of data and (4) relevance. This paper is part of a series providing guidance on how to apply CERQual and focuses on making an overall assessment of confidence in a review finding and creating a CERQual Evidence Profile and a CERQual Summary of Qualitative Findings table. Methods We developed this guidance by examining the methods used by other GRADE approaches, gathering feedback from relevant research communities and developing consensus through project group meetings. We then piloted the guidance on several qualitative evidence syntheses before agreeing on the approach. Results Confidence in the evidence is an assessment of the extent to which a review finding is a reasonable representation of the phenomenon of interest. Creating a summary of each review finding and deciding whether or not CERQual should be used are important steps prior to assessing confidence. Confidence should be assessed for each review finding individually, based on the judgements made for each of the four CERQual components. Four levels are used to describe the overall assessment of confidence: high, moderate, low or very low. The overall CERQual assessment for each review finding should be explained in a CERQual Evidence Profile and Summary of Qualitative Findings table. Conclusions Structuring and summarising review findings, assessing confidence in those findings using CERQual and creating a CERQual Evidence Profile and Summary of Qualitative Findings table should be essential components of undertaking qualitative evidence syntheses. This paper describes the end point of a CERQual assessment and should be read in conjunction with the other papers in the series that provide information on assessing individual CERQual components. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-017-0689-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This is the first in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE). The SHARE Program is an investigation of concepts, opportunities, methods and implications for evidence-based investment and disinvestment in health technologies and clinical practices in a local healthcare setting. The papers in this series are targeted at clinicians, managers, policy makers, health service researchers and implementation scientists working in this context. This paper presents an overview of the organisation-wide, systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach taken by one Australian healthcare network and provides an introduction and guide to the suite of papers reporting the experiences and outcomes.

Background\ud \ud The MODEM project (A comprehensive approach to MODelling outcome and costs impacts of interventions for DEMentia) explores how changes in arrangements for the future treatment and care of people living with dementia, and support for family and other unpaid carers, could result in better outcomes and more efficient use of resources.\ud \ud Methods\ud \ud MODEM starts with a systematic mapping of the literature on effective and (potentially) cost-effective interventions in dementia care. Those findings, as well as data from a cohort, will then be used to model the quality of life and cost impacts of making these evidence-based interventions more widely available in England over the period from now to 2040. Modelling will use a suite of models, combining microsimulation and macrosimulation methods, modelling the costs and outcomes of care, both for an individual over the life-course from the point of dementia diagnosis, and for individuals and England as a whole in a particular year.\ud \ud Project outputs will include an online Dementia Evidence Toolkit, making evidence summaries and a literature database available free to anyone, papers in academic journals and other written outputs, and a MODEM Legacy Model, which will enable local commissioners of services to apply the model to their own populations.\ud \ud Discussion\ud \ud Modelling the effects of evidence-based cost-effective interventions and making this information widely available has the potential to improve the health and quality of life both of people with dementia and their carers, while ensuring that resources are used efficiently.

In May 2013, the WHO Member States requested the WHO to establish a Global Observatory on Health Research and Development (R&D), as part of a strategic work-plan to promote innovation, build capacity, improve access, and mobilize resources to address diseases that disproportionately affect the world’s poorest countries. The rationale for establishing a Global Observatory on Health R&D is to provide a mechanism to monitor and analyse health R&D resource flows, product pipelines, and research outputs, aiming to contribute to the identification of gaps to inform priority-setting for new R&D investments to be operationalized through a new global financing and coordination mechanism for health R&D and utilized by all stakeholders informing health research policy decisions in countries, civil society, and the private sector. As one of the mechanisms to achieve the goals of the Global Observatory on Health R&D, the WHO is launching a Call for Papers to be published as a Thematic Series in Health Research Policy and Systems to contribute state-of-the-art knowledge and innovative approaches to analyse, interpret, and report on health R&D information. Further, to serve as a key resource to inform the future WHO-convened coordination mechanism, which will be utilized to generate evidence-informed priorities for new R&D investments to be financed through a proposed new global financing and coordination mechanism for health R&D. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1478-4505-13-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background In an attempt to address a complex disease burden, including improving progress towards MDGs 4 and 5, South Africa recently introduced a re-engineered Primary Health Care (PHC) strategy, which has led to the development of a national community health worker (CHW) programme. The present study explored the development of a cell phone-based and paper-based monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system to support the work of the CHWs. Methods One sub-district in the North West province was identified for the evaluation. One outreach team comprising ten CHWs maintained both the paper forms and mHealth system to record household data on community-based services. A comparative analysis was done to calculate the correspondence between the paper and phone records. A focus group discussion was conducted with the CHWs. Clinical referrals, data accuracy and supervised visits were compared and analysed for the paper and phone systems. Results Compared to the mHealth system where data accuracy was assured, 40% of the CHWs showed a consistently high level (>90% correspondence) of data transfer accuracy on paper. Overall, there was an improvement over time, and by the fifth month, all CHWs achieved a correspondence of 90% or above between phone and paper data. The most common error that occurred was summing the total number of visits and/or activities across the five household activity indicators. Few supervised home visits were recorded in either system and there was no evidence of the team leader following up on the automatic notifications received on their cell phones. Conclusions The evaluation emphasizes the need for regular supervision for both systems and rigorous and ongoing assessments of data quality for the paper system. Formalization of a mHealth M&E system for PHC outreach teams delivering community based services could offer greater accuracy of M&E and enhance supervision systems for CHWs.

Background Providing patient information to physicians in usable form is of high importance. Electronic presentation of patient data may have benefits in efficiency and error rate reduction for these physician facing interfaces. Using a cancer symptom measurement tool (the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI)) we assessed the usability of patient data in its raw paper form and compared that to presentation on two electronic presentation formats of different sizes. Methods In two separate experiments, undergraduates completed two identical six-part questionnaires on two twenty-patient MDASI data sets. In Experiment 1, participants completed one questionnaire using a paper packet and the other questionnaire using an in-house designed iPad application. In Experiment 2, MDASI data was evaluated using an iPad and iPod Touch. Participants assessed the usability of the devices directly after use. In a third experiment, medical professionals evaluated the paper and iPad interfaces in order to validate the findings from Experiment 1. Results Participants were faster and more accurate answering questions about patients when using the iPad. The results from the medical professionals were similar. No appreciable accuracy, task time, or usability differences were observed between the iPad and iPod Touch. Conclusions Overall, the use of our tablet interface increased the accuracy and speed that users could extract pertinent information from a multiple patient MDASI data set compared to paper. Reducing the size of the interface did not negatively affect accuracy, speed, or usability. Generalization of the results to other physician facing interfaces is discussed.

PREFACEPublic health challenges develop over time and vary across countries. Society changes as do population health threats, and public health systems accordingly attempt to adapt to change. As reflected in ASPHER's activities, public health training programmes must reflect these continuously developing changes in a dynamic way. From time to time all organisations need to revise their mission statements and the ethical context for their activities as part of the process of adaptation to change.Theodore Tulchinsky, together with Christopher Birt, Ramune Kalediene and Andre Meijer, members of the ASPHER Executive Board, prepared this Working Paper. They take a wide perspective and context for ASPHER's mission, addressing the ethics, values, vision and aims of the organisation, including some early targets for its activities.The Executive Board approved this Working Paper, under development for more than a year, as a basis for continuing discussion, so enabling the possibility for members to agree formally upon ASPHER's values, vision, mission and aims. The first opportunity for such discussion will offer itself at the Annual Conference in Valencia at the end of October this year.Suresnes, 2 October 2007Anders FoldspangPresident - ASPHERPREAMBLEThe peoples of Europe have benefited greatly from the startling successes of modern public health of the 19th and 20th centuries, which has brought sanitation, environmental and occupational health, vaccination, control of infectious diseases, safer and healthier foods, healthier mothers and babies, family planning, declining mortality from coronary heart disease and stroke, as well as from motor-vehicle crashes, and recognition of tobacco use as a major health hazard. The result is increased longevity, with improved health standards and quality of life for the peoples of the industrialized countries. But this improvement is far from uniform for all population groups and countries across Europe, with many countries in post-Soviet transition and other poor and developing countries still suffering from low health standards; in many such countries the New Public Health remains a novel and challenging concept.Public health developed on the basis of, and continues to rely upon, a wide spectrum of available social, legislative as well as biomedical and environmental interventions. Health promotion is incorporated within this increasing scope of public health, and it addresses complex public health problems that are largely influenced by social conditions as well as by individual and group knowledge, attitudes, practices, and behaviours. This complex of causation and of intervention approaches applies in prevention and control of HIV, cardiovascular diseases, motor vehicle injury, mental health, threatened pandemics, and terrorism, as well as in communicable diseases and in many other health problems facing individuals, groups and communities. European schools of Public Health, and ASPHER as their association, have a continuing role in promoting new public health policies as dictated by changing epidemiology and as enabled by new technologies.The ethical base of public health in Europe developed in the context of the 19th and early 20th century successes, and was codified following lessons learned from the corruption by dark forces, using eugenics theories to justify the killing hundreds of thousands of helpless individuals, genocide and the Holocaust, with the killing of millions in efficient systems of mass murder. The threats of genocide, ethnic cleansing and terrorism have departed from neither the European nor the world stages, and the utmost degree of vigilance is required to prevent their recurrence. As in the case of war, these constitute grave threats to public health and international human rights. The lessons learned from the 20th century tragedies help us today to address increasingly complex ethical issues in public health, by balancing the rights of the individual with those of the community. …

Background Much implementation research is focused on full-scale trials with little evidence of preceding modelling work. The Medical Research Council Framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions has argued for more and better theoretical and exploratory work prior to a trial as a means of improving intervention development. Intervention modelling experiments (IMEs) are a way of exploring and refining an intervention before moving to a full-scale trial. They do this by delivering key elements of the intervention in a simulation that approximates clinical practice by, for example, presenting general practitioners (GPs) with a clinical scenario about making a treatment decision. Methods The current proposal will run a full, web-based IME involving 250 GPs that will advance the methodology of IMEs by directly comparing results with an earlier paper-based IME. Moreover, the web-based IME will evaluate an intervention that can be put into a full-scale trial that aims to reduce antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in primary care. The study will also include a trial of email versus postal invitations to participate. Discussion More effective behaviour change interventions are needed and this study will develop one such intervention and a system to model and test future interventions. This system will be applicable to any situation in the National Health Service where behaviour needs to be modified, including interventions aimed directly at the public. Trial registration ClinicalTrials (NCT): NCT01206738

Bangladesh, a Muslim-majority country, has a national organ donation law that was passed in 1999 and revised in 2018. The law allows living-related and brain-dead donor organ transplantation. There are no legal barriers to these two types of organ donations, but there is no legislation providing necessary costs and incentive measures associated with successful organ transplants. However, many governments across the globe provide different types of incentives for motivating living donors and families of deceased donors. This study assesses the merits and demerits of incentive measures already in use around the world and proposes ethical measures that can promote organ donation in Bangladesh. The primary focus of this paper is to present an ethical analysis of the comparison of incentive measures on organ donation between Bangladesh and the Islamic Republic of Iran as two Muslim countries that operate organ donation for transplantation practices according to Islamic principles. In this paper, I mainly argue that providing a fixed bare minimum financial incentive measure to distantly related living donors and families of deceased donors will encourage Bangladeshis to donate organs in a manner that is ethically justifiable, morally permissible, and socio-economically appropriate. The government of Bangladesh should revise the existing biomedical law to include a provision related to incentive measures and set a strict policy to properly regulate these measures as key stewardship that can ethically promote organ donation for transplantation.

Over the last 3 decades, a growing volume of research documents disparities in health care access, treatment, and health status for people from racial and ethnic minority groups in the United States. Former Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher noted the persistence of health disparities and called for their elimination by the year 2010. Understanding the extent of racial and ethnic disparities is the first step toward their elimination, but understanding why disparities exist and how to eliminate disparities requires further research. The factors that contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in health status are diverse and span social, economic, educational, ecological, environmental, and behavioral issues as well as problems in health care and other systems, and interpersonal interactions between providers and patients. In addition, genetic and biologic factors interact with these social and environmental factors across the life span. There are many factors in the health care system, ranging from the lack of universal health insurance to the under-representation of African Americans, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and American Indians and Alaska Natives among health care professionals, that present tremendous barriers to care for people from racial and ethnic minority populations. Research documents disparities in treatment and the use of procedures in people from racial and ethnic minority groups.1 In general, minorities receive less-intensive hospital care,2 fewer cardiovascular procedures,3 fewer antiretrovirals for HIV infections,4 less-aggressive treatment of prostate cancer,5 fewer orthopedic procedures,6 less analgesia for cancer pain,7 and lower quality prenatal care.8 In 1999, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation reported the results of a national survey that found that 16% of whites, 35% of blacks, and 30% of Latinos believe that racism in health care is a major problem. A significant proportion of blacks and Latinos reported that they had experienced bias or discrimination in the health care system due to their race/ethnicity or English language ability.9 The recent Commonwealth Fund report indicated that 18% of Hispanics, 16% of blacks, 13% of Asians, and 9% of whites had experienced disrespect in the health care system.10 Communication with their providers is a major problem for members of racial and ethnic minority groups. The Commonwealth Fund survey reported that blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have more difficulty communicating with their providers and understanding provider instructions and other health information, and are less involved in their care than they would like to be.10 Researchers have investigated communication in patient and provider pairs in which race is discordant and found that providers are less likely to encourage participatory interactions when the physician is white and the patient black.11 Other studies have documented difference in quality of care for Medicare recipients in managed care settings.12 It is time to move beyond simply describing disparities to better understanding why disparities exist and developing strategies for eliminating them. Eliminating disparities requires thoughtful approaches in the way we deliver clinical care, the way we conduct research, and the way we educate current and future physicians. The Journal of General Internal Medicine therefore issues this call for papers that focus on disparities in health for a Special Issue. The goals of the Special Issue are to increase readers’ understanding of the complexity of factors that contribute to health disparities, to reinforce the need for interventions at multiple levels to eliminate health disparities, and to highlight research methodologies that are appropriate for investigating racial, ethnic, and other disparities in health status and health care quality. The Special Issue will contain review articles and original empirical studies that focus on policies, social determinants, interpersonal factors, and other factors that contribute to disparities. We seek articles that describe approaches to eliminating disparities at multiple levels, including communities, health care systems, and interpersonal interactions. We also seek to describe innovative curricula related to educating physicians about disparities and cultural competence as well as programs that promote the recruitment, retention, and advancement of under-represented minorities in medicine. The Special Issue will include approximately 10 to 12 articles including 5 to 6 original studies, brief reports, review articles, perspectives, or original studies under Innovations in Education and Clinical Practice, Health Policy or Populations at Risk. The submission deadline is February 1, 2003.

JGIM plans to publish a special issue devoted to aspects of addressing alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use in patients seen in the primary care setting. This call for papers comes at a time when substance abuse issues are being recognized increasingly as mainstream general internal medicine concerns. This shift has occurred over the past decade as the importance of substance abuse disorders in medical practice has become well established. It has been estimated that alcohol consumption is responsible for over 100,000 deaths annually and over $100 billion in economic costs in the United States.1 When the impact of tobacco and illicit drug use is added to these figures, the total number of deaths per year increases to over 500,0002 and total economic costs are approximately one quarter of a trillion dollars.3 Underlying these findings regarding substance use-related mortality and costs is the fact that the use of alcohol, tobacco, and drugs has been closely linked to a variety of medical and psychosocial problems, all of which may prompt a visit to a primary care physician or health care facility. For example, over 25% of admissions to community hospitals are alcohol related4 and the prevalence of alcohol abuse or dependence ranges from 16 to 36% in outpatient medical settings.5 A recent study of adult primary care patients demonstrated that 60% used alcohol, of whom 9% were at-risk drinkers, 8% were problem drinkers and 5% were alcohol dependent.6 Data from this same study showed that 27% of these primary care patients used tobacco, and at least 20% had a history of illicit drug use, of whom 5% were current illicit drug users.6 Such studies give compelling evidence that substance use disorders are prevalent in primary care practice. Physicians need to be prepared to deal with these issues. Yet, we have a suboptimal record of identifying and addressing patients' needs in this regard in both inpatient and outpatient settings.4,7 Recognition of the importance of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug abuse disorders in primary care practice has resulted in a call for primary care physicians to take a larger role in the identification and management of substance use disorders.8–11 These disorders are after all quite similar to other problems managed by primary care physicians. They are characterized by a chronic course with periodic exacerbations and have both medical and psychosocial sequelae. Perhaps more importantly, these conditions can be identified by well-established screening methods and do respond to effective treatment. Recent research on the identification and treatment of substance use disorders has focussed on primary care settings. Increasingly, this research is being performed by investigators who are from fields such as General Internal Medicine, General Pediatrics, and Family Medicine. For example, major advances in the identification of effective screening methods for alcohol use disorders have been the result of research done in primary care settings by generalist physicians. As a result of this work, we now understand the utility of screening instruments such as the CAGE and the AUDIT and know the importance of early identification of alcohol problems.12–20 In addition, evidence is convincing that effective management of “at risk” and problem drinking and tobacco use can be delivered in the primary care setting.21–24 Even the treatment of illicit drug use with pharmacotherapies that historically were restricted to specialized treatment programs may soon become the province of primary care.25 The Society of General Internal Medicine's (SGIM) Substance Abuse Task Force has been at the forefront of these developments. The Task Force's members are among the leading investigators, educators, and clinicians in the substance abuse field. The group has taken a leadership role in bringing issues related to substance abuse “into the fold” of SGIM and generalist physicians in other fields.26 At the 2000 SGIM national meeting, the Task Force decided to seek publication of a special issue of JGIM which would focus on substance abuse. With the support of the Josiah Macy Foundation and the Physician Leadership on National Drug Policy (PLNDP), the Task Force will be sponsoring the publication of this issue entitled “Substance Abuse: Innovations in Primary Care” in early 2002. This special issue will follow standard JGIM format, with all articles focussed on aspects of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drug use relevant to generalist physicians. Authors may submit original research articles, brief reports, reviews, perspectives, reflections, or articles appropriate for the Journal's new sections on Health Policy, Populations at Risk, and Innovations in Education and Clinical Practice (see JGIM's instructions for authors at http://www.blackwellscience.com/journals/internal/form.html). The deadline for submission of articles is June 1, 2001. As Co-Chairs of the SGIM Task Force, we will serve as Co-Editors of this special issue. For further information concerning submission of original manuscripts or to volunteer to review articles, please contact Jeffrey Samet (ude.ub@temasj) or Patrick O'Connor (ude.elay@ronnoco.kcirtap).

Background Removing user fees in primary health care services is one of the most critical policy issues being considered in Africa. User fees were introduced in many African countries during the 1980s and their impacts are well documented. Concerns regarding the negative impacts of user fees have led to a recent shift in health financing debates in Africa. Kenya is one of the countries that have implemented a user fees reduction policy. Like in many other settings, the new policy was evaluated less that one year after implementation, the period when expected positive impacts are likely to be highest. This early evaluation showed that the policy was widely implemented, that levels of utilization increased and that it was popular among patients. Whether or not the positive impacts of user fees removal policies are sustained has hardly been explored. We conducted this study to document the extent to which primary health care facilities in Kenya continue to adhere to a 'new' charging policy 3 years after its implementation. Methods Data were collected in two districts (Kwale and Makueni). Multiple methods of data collection were applied including a cross-sectional survey (n = 184 households Kwale; 141 Makueni), Focus Group Discussions (n = 12) and patient exit interviews (n = 175 Kwale; 184 Makueni). Results Approximately one third of the survey respondents could not correctly state the recommended charges for dispensaries, while half did not know what the official charges for health centres were. Adherence to the policy was poor in both districts, but facilities in Makueni were more likely to adhere than those in Kwale. Only 4 facilities in Kwale adhered to the policy compared to 10 in Makueni. Drug shortage, declining revenue, poor policy design and implementation processes were the main reasons given for poor adherence to the policy. Conclusion We conclude that reducing user fees in primary health care in Kenya is a policy on paper that is yet to be implemented fully. We recommend that caution be taken when deciding on how to reduce or abolish user fees and that all potential consequences are carefully considered.

In 2002, the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM) will publish a Special Issue devoted to community-based participatory research (CBPR). This model of research emphasizes active involvement of community representatives and organizations in all stages and aspects of the research process as a means toward generating highly relevant findings in a manner that is ethical and beneficial to those involved. The Special Issue will highlight some of the outstanding work that is being done in this area and the role that it can play in improving the care and outcomes of populations at risk. While participatory research has existed for some time in many fields, its role has been less accepted in clinical and health services research. Increasingly, however, researchers and policy makers are recognizing the value of meaningful involvement of patients, their relatives and neighbors, and local organizations.1 The first-hand experiences and contextual understanding of community members complement the skills and knowledge of researchers and often enhance the relevance and usefulness of research findings.2 Community members and patients often will be able to articulate priority areas, and identify which questions should be asked and how they should be answered. Their perspectives and insights into the social and cultural dynamics of a community can inform researchers' future work. In addition, community members often can make substantial contributions to study implementation, analysis and interpretation of results, and dissemination of findings such that involvement directly benefits participants and others. CBPR has been identified as a key strategy in efforts to reduce disparities, whether they are racial, ethnic, socioeconomic or geographic.3 Participation of community members can narrow the linguistic and cultural gaps that exist between many underserved groups and researchers. Substantial community involvement also promises indirect benefits. These include the development of new skills, capacity, and empowerment for community members. It can result in a reduction in the distrust that many communities have developed for researchers because of prior studies resulting in direct harm such as Tuskeegee, stigmatization associated with public reporting of unfavorable data, and use of findings for financial or professional profit without benefit to the subjects that were involved.4 This Special Issue on CBPR builds on efforts of the Society of General Internal Medicine, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation to help CBPR fulfill its potential as an important influence on health care policies and practices. We encourage authors to submit original research articles and brief reports as well as manuscripts that would fit the Journal's sections for Innovations in Education and Clinical Practice, Populations at Risk, and Health Policy. These submitted manuscripts will be considered for publication along with several commissioned papers focused on the unique role that CBPR plays in the spectrum of health services research. The commissioned papers will address some of the major challenges facing CBPR and steps that can be taken to alleviate them. These include how incentives to participate can be enhanced for both communities and academics, how additional capacity can be developed for both communities and academics, and how opportunities for funding this type of work can be expanded. The deadline for submission of papers is March 1, 2002. Please contact the JGIM office with any questions at (410) 955-9868 or ude.imhj@migj.

This paper is the second of two in a series. In our first paper, we presented a social justice framework emerging from an extensive literature review and incorporating core social determinants specific to mental health in the age of COVID-19 and illustrated specific social determinants impacting mental health (SDIMH) of our resettled Bhutanese refugee population during the pandemic. This second paper details specific barriers to the SDIMH detrimental to the basic human rights and social justice of this population during this pandemic. The SDIMH, as described, further informs the need for social justice measures and cultural humility in mental healthcare, public health, law, and community engagement. This work concludes with a proposed call to action toward mental health improvement and fair treatment for refugee populations in three core areas: communication and education, social stigma and discrimination, and accessibility and availability of resources.

Surrogacy is one of the desired reproductive technologies for family formation, yet surrogate mothers are subjected to unethical treatments and unbalanced power relations in India. Such treatment obscures women’s free decision-making and can be detrimental to their maternal self. Recently, the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, has received the President’s approval to regulate surrogacy practices by limiting them for the altruistic motives which have again provoked the burning debates regarding reproductive technologies, women’s emancipation and procreative labour. The paper thus explores women’s agency, maternal freedom and surrogate arrangements in Indian society. The complexity of the implementation of the law, vulnerability of surrogate labour, woman’s bodily autonomy and reproductive choices have been analysed. This has been done through comprehensive feminist discussions on motherhood experience in terms of enforced vs. voluntary to find the way to protect women’s freedom and subjectivity in the task of ‘mothering as empowerment’.

Birthing is a natural phenomenon. However, in the era of modernisation, it has dramatically changed and transformed into a technological affair. Some feminists claim that advances in medicine and assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) have opened up numerous opportunities and choices for women to free themselves from their destined role of maternity by separating sex from reproduction. But are these technological artefacts always there to emancipate women or just another way to keep them subordinated to serve social needs? Other feminists argue that technology is a controlling tool. It eliminates a woman’s choice and uses her body as a baby-manufacturing machine to perpetuate pervasive social roles and responsibilities. Again, if technology is simply a patriarchal trap, then can technological exclusion be the key to all reproductive issues? It seems not! Technology is the inevitable new reality of the world influenced by socio-cultural practices, values, norms and belief system that has a strong impact on human existence. The present paper is an attempt to critically explore and evaluate the ethical challenges posed by technicization of motherhood from two opposite feminist perspectives. I argue that these ART-centred debates are significant but polarised and insufficient to resolve maternal problems. Thus, we need an egalitarian model of technology that saves women from the threat of technicization, and be able to provide a dignified use of it. The paper discusses the impact of technicization on maternal self in relation to ARTs and proposes suggestions to overcome this problem.

This paper reflects on the social consequences of biotechnological control of population for values and ethics of care within the family household in rural north India. Based on long-term ethnographic research, it illustrates the manner in which social practices intermingle with reproductive choices and new reproductive technologies, leading to a systematic elimination of female foetuses, and thus, imbalanced sex ratios. This technological fashioning of populations, the paper argues, has far-reaching consequences for the institutions of family, marriage and kinship in north India particularly in relation to care circulation within the family-household leading to a shifting local ethics of care.

As political instruments, human rights can be challenged in two important ways: first, by undermining the claim to universality by appealing to a kind of cultural relativism, and second, by accusing human rights of unjustifiably imposing values that are not genuinely universal (which I dub the problem of parochialism). The human right to health is no exception. If a human right to health is to be a useful instrument in mobilizing action for global health justice, then we need to take seriously the ways that health intersects with culture. Universal applicability is essential to both the legitimacy and efficacy of human rights. But without cultural sensitivity, additional injustices and imperialistic harms may be perpetuated. There are two goals within this paper-(1) to show that cultural imperialism is a moral and practical hazard, both in general and for the human right to health in particular and (2) to articulate a way of thinking about the human right to health that can minimize these hazards and arm it with moral credibility and political weight.

This paper examines the role of institutions—notably the degree of administrative decentralisation across levels of government—in health care decision-making and health spending as well as life expectancy. The empirical analysis builds on a new methodology to analyse health sector performance. In particular, the present analysis examines the impact of centralisation versus decentralisation of responsibilities across levels of government, making use of newly collected data on governance and expenditure assignment, as well as non-linear empirical specifications. An interlocking U-shaped relationship is found with respect to expenditure and life expectancy. Under moderate decentralisation, public spending in health care is lower, while life expectancy is higher, compared with more centralised systems; however, in highly decentralised systems, public spending is higher and life expectancy is lower. This finding of a “fish-shaped” relationship for decentralisation and outcomes also helps to understand recent reforms of OECD health systems, which have often reverted towards more moderate degrees of administrative decentralisation. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10198-021-01390-1.

Although the patient’s right to decide what they want for themselves, which is encompassed in the notion of ‘patient-centred medicine’ and ‘informed consent’, is widely recognised and emphasised in Japan, there remain grave problems when it comes to respecting the wishes of the no-longer-competent when death is imminent. In general, it is believed that the concepts above do not include the right to refuse treatment when treatment withdrawal inevitably results in death, even when the patient previously expressed the wish to exercise this right when competent. In this paper, I first explain the current social and legal situation in Japan, where the lack of legal clarity regarding the right to reject treatment tends to result in doctors adopting the interpretation of patients’ words that is least conducive to treatment withdrawal. I then argue that the right to refuse treatment should be taken seriously, even when the patient is no longer competent, or the treatment refusal will result in death. I suggest that the concept of relational autonomy might have some practical and valuable implications in a country where individual autonomy is considered incompatible with societal values. Finally, I answer possible objections to relational autonomy and address the widespread societal concern about sliding down the slippery slope from allowing the right to refuse treatment to the obligation to die.

This paper proposes a first monetary measure of the private costs of celiac disease, including intangible costs (physical symptoms, logistical constraints, etc.) in Switzerland. This auto-immune disease damages the intestine when patients ingest gluten. The only treatment currently available is a gluten-free diet, which implies great nutritional constraints. To get a monetary equivalent of the costs borne by celiac patients, we used a contingent valuation. The scenario suggested to celiac patients a treatment in form of a daily pill, which would allow them to eat normally and avoid any physical pain from celiac disease. Mean Willingness To Pay (WTP) for the treatment is found to be around CHF 87 (approx. USD 87) per month. WTP is positively influenced by direct and indirect costs of the disease. Oppositely, individuals, who find the gluten-free diet healthier are willing to pay less. Finally, unlike symptoms before diagnostic, the current presence or intensity of physical symptoms are found to be insignificant. The latter result can be explained by the fact that, individuals facing stronger symptoms are more likely to adhere strictly to the GFD and hence to reduce their frequency.

Based on an analysis of a landmark case Lim Mey Lee Susan v Singapore Medical Council in Singapore where a doctor was professionally disciplined for over-charging a wealthy patient, a judgement upheld by the Singapore High Court, this paper will discuss the notion of an ‘ethical price’ (EP) and its determination with respect to the provision of healthcare services. It will first examine the limitations of a legal approach for setting an ethical limit to pricing. From there, it will argue that Confucian philosophy provides a useful ethical framework to explore EP, with focus on the context of Singapore. The following question is addressed: What is an ethical pricing standard for medical practice from a Confucian perspective? The strengths and limitations of a Confucian value base as regards the determination of an objective EP will be analysed through an examination of the shortcomings of the doctor’s behaviour in the Susan Lim case as well as other case scenarios. The paper will conclude with some practical suggestions on how Confucian-based ideas can be applied to decision-making on pricing and the importance of this for medical professionalism and ethics teaching.

Post-mortem reproduction is a complex and contested matter attracting attention from a diverse group of scholars and resulting in various responses from a range of countries. Vietnam has been reluctant to deal directly with this matter and has, accordingly, permitted post-mortem reproduction implicitly. First, by analysing Vietnam's post-mortem reproduction cases, this paper reflects on the manner in which Vietnamese authorities have handled each case in the context of the contemporary legal framework, and it reveals the moral questions arising therefrom. The article then offers an account of Vietnamese social norms as an explanation for the tendency to conduct post-mortem reproduction. In arguing that a deeper and more thorough examination of the moral and ethical reasoning is required, the paper advocates in favour of supportive post-mortem reproduction regulation. In doing so, the paper seeks to reconcile the Vietnamese legal framework and post-mortem reproduction experiences of other countries. The article concludes that Vietnam and countries sharing the similar cultural traits should permit post-mortem reproduction explicitly. This would require full engagement with the ethical and legal issues arising, and careful promulgation of regulations and guidelines based on comparative experiences of a range of countries in handling this matter.

Hospital quality indicators provide valuable insights for quality improvement, empower patients to choose providers, and have become a cornerstone of value-based payment. As outcome indicators are cumbersome and expensive to measure, many health systems have relied on proxy indicators, such as structure and process indicators. In this paper, we assess the extent to which publicly reported structure and process indicators are correlated with outcome indicators, to determine if these provide useful signals to inform the public about the outcomes. Quality indicators for three conditions (breast and colorectal cancer, and hip replacement surgery) for Dutch hospitals (2011–2018) were collected. Structure and process indicators were compared to condition-specific outcome indicators and in-hospital mortality ratios in a between-hospital comparison (cross-sectional and between-effects models) and in within-hospital comparison (fixed-effects models). Systematic association could not be observed for any of the models. Both positive and negative signs were observed where negative associations were to be expected. Despite sufficient statistical power, the share of significant correlations was small [mean share: 13.2% (cross-sectional); 26.3% (between-effects); 13.2% (fixed-effects)]. These findings persisted in stratified analyses by type of hospital and in models using a multivariate approach. We conclude that, in the context of compulsory public reporting, structure and process indicators are not correlated with outcome indicators, neither in between-hospital comparisons nor in within-hospital comparisons. While structure and process indicators remain valuable for internal quality improvement, they are unsuitable as signals for informing the public about hospital differences in health outcomes. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10198-021-01333-w.

The United Kingdom (UK) case R v Lee (2010) EWCA Crim 1404 resulted in a pharmacist being convicted for an inadvertent dispensing error and paved way for the decriminalisation of such errors by way of a due diligence defence enacted in 2018. In relation to Hong Kong (HK), what is its legal position for dispensing errors, and can it follow the decriminalising steps of UK? The primary objective of this paper is to explore whether and how HK can reach the normative position for a dispensing error legal regime: (1) I posit that the normative position for healthcare professional (HCP) liability for dispensing errors should prioritise the public interest of minimisation of future dispensing errors over the retribution of past wrongs; (2) I illustrate HK’s current position for the liabilities of HCPs on dispensing errors, focusing analysis on the relatively controversial aspects of HK’s criminal liability, referencing the landmark cases Hin Lin Yee v HKSAR (2009) 13 HKCFAR 142 and Kulemesin v HKSAR (2013) 16 HKCFAR 195 to assist my analysis of the requisite mental element for relevant statutory offences; (3) through comparison with UK’s development post-R v Lee and application of Rule of Law principles, HK’s current position is critiqued, coming to the conclusion that while there are compelling reasons for the decriminalisation of dispensing errors in HK, the prerequisite for this to happen is an overhaul of regulatory frameworks by significantly increasing levels of accountability.

This paper analyzes the epidemiological and economic effects of quarantines. We use a basic epidemiological model, a SEIR-model, that is calibrated to roughly resemble the COVID-19 pandemic, and we assume that individuals that become infected or are isolated on average lose a share of their productivity. An early quarantine postpones but does not alter the course of the pandemic at a cost that increases in the duration and the extent of the quarantine. For quarantines at later stages of the pandemic there is a trade-off between lowering the peak level of infectious people on the one hand and minimizing fatalities and economic losses on the other hand. A longer quarantine dampens the peak level of infectious people and also reduces the total number of infected persons but increases economic losses. Both the peak level of infectious individuals and the total share of the population that will have been infected are U-shaped in relation to the share of the population in quarantine, while economic costs increase in this share. In particular, a quarantine covering a moderate share of the population leads to a lower peak, fewer deaths and lower economic costs, but it implies that the peak of the pandemic occurs earlier.

In this paper, I examine the rhetoric employed by court judgements, with a particular emphasis on the narrative construct of the ‘passive patient’. This construction advances and reinforces paternalistic values, which have scant regard for the patients’ preferences, values, or choices within the legal context. Further, I critique the rhetoric employed and argue that the use of this rhetoric is the basis for a precedent that limits the understanding and respect of patients. Through this paper, I present the contemporary use of the ‘passive patient’ construct in the context of the Indian legal system and describe how such constructions have become a source of normative justification for legal reasoning that jeopardizes the patient’s agency. I argue for the primacy of ‘respect for persons’ within Indian law and the need to treat each patient as a person who has agency, preferences, and values during clinical interactions. I conclude by suggesting that laws that adopt narratives that acknowledging the significance of patient engagement and the relevance of effective communication during clinical encounters would help cultivate a culture of patient-centred care, by moving beyond the rhetoric of ‘passive patient’ and the ‘health/choice’ dichotomy.

The conception of saviour siblings using preimplantation genetic diagnosis coupled with human leukocyte antigen (HLA) typing or HLA typing alone is controversial and receives a wide divergence of legal responses among countries around the world. The resulting child conceived through this procedure is dubbed a ‘saviour sibling’ as the child can potentially act as a compatible donor for an elder ailing sibling who needs a haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. At present, the acceptability of this procedure in Malaysia is ambiguous as there is no specific statute governing assisted reproductive technology, and the guideline issued by the Malaysian Medical Council does not expressly address this issue. The ethical arguments relating to the conception of saviour siblings in the current literature are mainly thought to reflect a liberal viewpoint which is predominantly Western in nature. This paper seeks to explore the perception of selected key stakeholders on the acceptability of and ethical concerns related to this procedure in the Malaysian context. The findings indicate that stakeholders generally support the conception of saviour siblings and some of their concerns echo the Western viewpoint. Interestingly, many were highly anxious about its economic implication, which is rarely discussed in the current literature on saviour siblings.

Results from economic evaluations of long-term outcomes are strongly dependent on the chosen discount rate. A recent review of national guidelines for evaluation of healthcare interventions finds that “the level of currently used discount rates seems relatively high in many countries”. However, this conclusion comes from a comparison to rates derived or observed for investments in safe assets, while rate of return requirements are typically considerably higher when investment involves risk. This paper reviews recent literature on how to account for project-specific risk in determination of the social rate of discount and discusses implications for economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. It concludes that the available empirical evidence strongly suggests that the demand for and consumer value of health and healthcare is co-variant with income, which therefore implies that there is a non-diversifiable risk component of health-related investment.

Background Antimicrobial resistance has been recognised as a global threat with carbapenemase- producing-Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) as a prime example. CPE has similarities to COVID-19 where asymptomatic patients may be colonised representing a source for onward transmission. There are limited treatment options for CPE infection leading to poor outcomes and increased costs. Admission screening can prevent cross-transmission by pre-emptively isolating colonised patients. Objective We assess the relative cost-effectiveness of screening programmes compared with no- screening. Methods A microsimulation parameterised with NHS Scotland date was used to model scenarios of the prevalence of CPE colonised patients on admission. Screening strategies were (a) two-step screening involving a clinical risk assessment (CRA) checklist followed by microbiological testing of high-risk patients; and (b) universal screening. Strategies were considered with either culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. All costs were reported in 2019 UK pounds with a healthcare system perspective. Results In the low prevalence scenario, no screening had the highest probability of cost-effectiveness. Among screening strategies, the two CRA screening options were the most likely to be cost-effective. Screening was more likely to be cost-effective than no screening in the prevalence of 1 CPE colonised in 500 admitted patients or more. There was substantial uncertainty with the probabilities rarely exceeding 40% and similar results between strategies. Screening reduced non-isolated bed-days and CPE colonisation. The cost of screening was low in relation to total costs. Conclusion The specificity of the CRA checklist was the parameter with the highest impact on the cost-effectiveness. Further primary data collection is needed to build models with less uncertainty in the parameters.

As members of the Clinical Practice Committee (CPC) of the Society for General Internal Medicine (SGIM), we support practice innovation and transformation to achieve a more just system by which all people can achieve and maintain optimal health. The COVID-19 pandemic has tested the US healthcare delivery system and sharpened our national awareness of long-standing and ingrained system shortcomings. In the face of crisis, SGIM members innovated and energetically mobilized to focus on the immediate needs of our patients and communities. Reflecting on these experiences, we are called to consider what was learned from the pandemic that applies to the future of healthcare delivery. CPC members include leaders in primary care delivery, practice finance, quality of care, patient safety, hospital practice, and health policy. CPC members provide expertise in clinical practice, serving as primary care doctors, hospitalists, and patient advocates who understand the intensity of care needed for those with severe COVID-19 infections, the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on Black and Brown communities, the struggles created for those with poor access to care, and the physical and emotional impact it has placed on patients, families, and clinicians. In this consensus statement, we summarize lessons learned from the 2020-2021 pandemic and their broader implications for reform in healthcare delivery. We provide a platform for future work by identifying many interactive elements of healthcare delivery that must be simultaneously addressed in order to ensure that care is accessible, equitably provided, patient-centered, and cost-effective.