Search

Your search keyword '"Lanthorn, Heather"' showing total 20 results
Start Over Author "Lanthorn, Heather"
20 results on '"Lanthorn, Heather"'

6. Three experiments on dignity in aid

Author

Wein, Tom, Lanthorn, Heather, and Fischer, Torben

Subjects
experiment, dignity, aid, development
Abstract

Examining how dignity and respect operate across the aid system, through survey experiments with US donors, US nonprofit professionals, and low-income Kenyans.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

10. Health Insurance Loss during COVID-19 May Increase Support for Universal Health Coverage.

Author

Fox, Ashley, Yongjin Choi, Lanthorn, Heather, and Croke, Kevin

Subjects
HEALTH policy, COMPUTER software, STATISTICS, SOCIAL support, UNEMPLOYMENT, COVID-19, PRACTICAL politics, MULTIVARIATE analysis, REGRESSION analysis, SURVEYS, NATIONAL health insurance, HEALTH insurance, CASE studies, DESCRIPTIVE statistics, PATIENT Protection & Affordable Care Act, STATISTICAL sampling, DATA analysis software, PUBLIC opinion, COVID-19 pandemic, MEDICARE, INSURANCE
Abstract

Context: The United States is the only high-income country that relies on employer-sponsored health coverage to insure a majority of its population. Millions of Americans lost employer-sponsored health insurance during the COVID- 19-induced economic downturn. We examine public opinion toward universal health coverage policies in this context. Methods: Through a survey of 1,211 Americans in June 2020. we examine the influence of health insurance loss on support for Medicare for All (M4A) and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in two ways. First. we examine associations between pandemic-related health insurance loss and M4A support. Second. we experimentally prime some respondents with a vignette of a sympathetic person who lost employer-sponsored coverage during COVID-19. Findings: We find that directly experiencing recent health insurance loss is strongly associated (10 pp, p <0.01) with greater M4A support and with more favorable views of extending the ACA (19.3 pp. p< 0.01). Experimental exposure to the vignette increasesM4A supportby 6 pp (p =0.05). Conclusions: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. situational framings can induce modest change in support for M4A. However. real-world health insurance losses are associated with larger differences in support for M4A and with greater support for existing safety net policies such as the ACA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

12. Action to protect the independence and integrity of global health research

Author

Storeng, Katerini T., Abimbola, Seye, Balabanova, Dina, Mccoy, David, Ridde, Valery, Filippi, Veronique, Roalkvam, Sidsel, Akello, Grace, Parker, Melissa, Palmer, Jennifer, Abejirinde, Ibukun, Adebiyi, Babatope, Affun-Adegbulu, Clara, Ahlgren, Jhon Alvarez, Ahmad, Ayesha, Al-Awlaqi, Sameh, Aloys, Zongo, Amul, Gianna Gayle, Arthur, Joshua, Asaduzzaman, Muhammad, Asgedom, Akeza Awealom, Assarag, Bouchra, Atchessi, Nicole, Atkins, Salla, Badejo, Okikiolu, Baeroe, Kristine, Molleh, Bailah, Bazzano, Alessandra, Behague, Dominique P., Beisel, Uli, Belaid, Loubna, Bernays, Sarah, Bhuiyan, Shafi, Biermann, Olivia, Birungi, Harriet, Blanchet, Karl, Blystad, Astrid, Bodson, Oriane, Bonnet, Emmanuel, Bose, Shibaji, Bozorgmehr, Kayvan, Brear, Michelle, Burgess, Rochelle, Byskov, Jens, Carillon, Severine, Cavallaro, Francesca L., Chabeda, Sophie, Chandler, Clare, Chapman, Rachel, Chikuse, Francis F., Chinwe, Juliana Iwu, Cislaghi, Beniamino, Closser, Svea, Colvin, Christopher J., Cresswell, Jenny, da Cunha Saddi, Fabiana, Daire, Judith, Dalglish, Sarah, de Brouwere, Vincent, de Sardan, Jean-Pierre Olivier, Delvaux, Therese, Desgrees du Lou, Annabel, Diallo, Brahima A., Diarra, Aissa, Dixon, Justin, Doherty, Tanya, Dumont, Alexandre, Eboreime, Ejemai, Engelbrecht, Beth, Erikson, Susan, Faye, Adama, Fischer, Sara, Fournet, Florence, Fox, Ashley M., Francis, Joel Msafiri, Gautier, Lara, George, Asha, Gilson, Lucy, Gimbel, Sarah, Glenn, Jeff, Gopinathan, Unni, Gordeev, Vladimir S., Gradmann, Christoph, Graham, Janice E., Gram, Lu, Greco, Giulia, Grepin, Karen, Guichard, Anne, Gupta, Pragya Tiwari, Guzman, Viveka, Haaland, Marte E. S., Haggblom, Anna, Hagopian, Amy, Hammarberg, Karin, Handschumacher, Pascal, Hann, Katrina, Hasselberg, Marie, Hawkes, Sarah, Howard, Natasha, Hurtig, Anna-Karin, Hussain, Sameera, Hutchinson, Eleanor, Idoteyin, Ezirim, Infanti, Jennifer J., Irwin, Rachel, Islam, Shariful, Joarder, Taufique, John, Preethi, Johnson, Ermel, Johri, Mira, Justice, Judith, Kabore, Charles, Kadio, Kadidiatou, Kamwa, Matthieu, Kelly, Ann H., Kenworthy, Nora, Kittelsen, Sonja, Kloster, Maren Olene, Kocsis, Emily, Koon, Adam, Kumar, Pratap, Lal, Arush, Lange, Isabelle, Lanthorn, Heather, Lees, Shelley, Lexchin, Joel, Lie, Ann Louise, Limenih, Gojjam, Litwin-Davies, Isabel, Lodda, Charles Clarke, Lonnroth, Knut, Manton, John, Manzi, Anatole, Manzoor, Mehr, Marchal, Bruno, Marten, Robert, Matsui, Mitsuaki, Mbewe, Allan, Mc Sween-Cadieux, Esther, McGoey, Linsey, McNeill, Desmond, Mendenhall, Emily, Mendez, Claudio A., Mirzoev, Tolib, Mohammed, Shafiu, Moland, Karen Marie, Molyneux, Sassy, Mumtaz, Zubia, Murray, Susan Fairley, Nambiar, Devaki, Nelson, Erica, Nieto-Sanchez, Claudia, Norheim, Ole Frithjof, Nouvet, Elysee, Obare, Francis, Okungu, Vincent, Onarheim, Kristine Husoy, Ostebo, Marit Tolo, Ouattara, Fatoumata, Ozawa, Sachiko, Pai, Madhukar, Paina, Ligia, Parashar, Rakesh, Paul, Elisabeth, Peeters, Koen, Pennetier, Cedric, Penn-Kekana, Loveday, Peters, David, Pfeiffer, James, Pot, Hanneke, Prashanth, N. S., Preston, Robyn, Puyvallee, Antoine de Bengy, Rahmalia, Annisa, Reid-Henry, Simon, Rodriguez, Daniela C., Ronse, Maya, Sacks, Emma, Samb, Oumar Malle, Sanders, David, Sarkar, Nandini, Sarriot, Eric, Scheel, Inger Brummenaes, Schwarz, Thomas, Scott, Kerry, Seeley, Janet, Seward, Nadine, Shannon, Geordan, Shearer, Jessica, Shelley, Katharine, Sherr, Kenneth, Shiffman, Jeremey, Simard, Frederic, Singh, Neha S., Soors, Werner, Springer, Rusla Anne, Strong, Adrienne, Sundby, Johanne, Taylor, Stephen, Tetui, Moses, Topp, Stephanie M., Tsofa, Benjamin, Turcotte-Tremblay, Anne-Marie, Undie, Chi-Chi, Van Belle, Sara, Van Heteren, Godelieve, van Rensburg, Andre Janse, Sriram, Veena, Venkatapuram, Sridhar, Wagenaar, Bradley H., Wallace, Lauren, Walugembe, David R., Wariri, Oghenebrume, Whiteside, Alan O. B. E., Yakob, Bereket, Zakayo, Scholastica, Zitti, Tony, Zwi, Anthony, Centre population et développement (CEPED - UMR_D 196), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Université Paris Descartes - Paris 5 (UPD5), and Signatories

Subjects
Project commissioning, media_common.quotation_subject, environmental health, Commission, Public administration, 03 medical and health sciences, Politics, 0302 clinical medicine, Political science, Agency (sociology), Global health, 030212 general & internal medicine, media_common, 030503 health policy & services, Health Policy, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Censorship, 16. Peace & justice, 3. Good health, Negotiation, Editorial, [SDV.SPEE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie, Human medicine, 0305 other medical science, International development
Abstract

In a recent Viewpoint in the Lancet , some of us shared our experience of censorship in donor-funded evaluation research and warned about a potential trend in which donors and their implementing partners use ethical and methodological arguments to undermine research.1 Reactions to the Viewpoint—and lively debate at the 2018 Global Symposium on Health Systems Research —suggest that similar experiences are common in implementation and policy research commissioned by international donors to study and evaluate large-scale, donor-funded health interventions and programmes, which are primarily implemented in low resource settings. ‘We all have the same stories’, was one of the first comments on the Viewpoint, followed by many private messages divulging instances of personal and institutional pressure, intimidation and censorship following attempts to disseminate unwanted findings. Such pressure comes from major donors and from international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) obliged to have an external assessment but who then maintain a high degree of confidentiality and control. That such experiences are widespread reflects the deeply political nature of the field of ‘global health’ and the interconnections between priority setting, policy making and project implementation, which sit within a broader set of deeply entrenched power structures.2 3 Researchers in this field routinely find themselves working within—and studying—complex power relations and so experience challenges in negotiating their own position between interests of commissioning agencies and funders, implementers and country governments, as well as those of their own research institutions and their partnerships with other researchers spanning high-income, middle-income and low-income countries.4–7 They often receive research funding from major donor agencies like the UK Department of International Development (DFID), the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Agence Francaise de Developpement (AFD), UNITAID and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,8 who commission evaluations for their own funded projects, even though they have …

Published
2018

19. Achieving Access to Antimalarials: Views From Ghana on the Political-Economy of Adopting and Implementing the Affordable Medicines Facility-Malaria (AMFm)

Author

Lanthorn, Heather Elisabeth and Reich, Michael R.

Subjects
Health Sciences, Public Health
Abstract

My research examines the adoption and implementation processes involved in transferring a global health policy into national-level practice. More specifically, I consider how high-level stakeholders adopted and street-level, private-sector retailers implemented the Phase I pilot of the Affordable Medicines Facility- malaria (AMFm) between mid-2009 and end-2011. The AMFm — a large-scale program housed at the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria — sought to improve access to high-quality malaria treatment through financing and delivery strategies using the public and private sectors. To date, the median implementation outcomes have been considered in the Independent Evaluation commissioned by the Global Fund but country-level processes and nuanced considerations of outcomes have gone unexplored. To better understand the AMFm pilot in Ghana, I collected both quantitative and qualitative data between August and December 2011. To consider adoption, I first use a grounded, qualitative approach to address: What explains the stands taken by national stakeholders towards and against participating in the AMFm’s Phase I? I generate explanatory categories about the different views — stands — key stakeholders in Ghana took about joining Phase I. Public health goals; indirect policy goals; and concerns about personal, organization, and national reputation help to explain the views of different high-level stakeholders. Second, I consider the actions taken by different stakeholders: To what extent can a multiple-streams approach to policy adoption help clarify Ghana’s decision to join in the AMFm’s pilot? I find the Multiple-Streams Approach cannot be used to explain adoption of the AMFm pilot in Ghana. However, a modified version accounting for the global and national levels simultaneously can explain this case. To consider implementation, I ask: Do retailers in Northern Region comply with Ghana’s the advertised AMFm Recommended Retail Price among for-profit, private-sector retailers? And, does non-compliance vary systematically with features of retailer structure or conduct? I find high compliance based on reported retail prices. I also find that neither measures of spatial competition nor having seen regulation enforced in the past explain the pattern of non-compliance. Rather, variation in the terminal supply price is highly associated with a retailer’s decision to charge at or above the RRP.

Published
2016

20. Methodological considerations for studying diabetes: understandings and actions in Chennai, India.

Author

Lanthorn HE

Subjects
Adult, Anthropometry, Biometry, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Health Surveys, Humans, India, Interviews as Topic, Male, Qualitative Research, Risk Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Surveys and Questionnaires, Diabetes Mellitus prevention & control, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Health Planning methods, Research Design
Abstract

As per the World Health Organization's global noncommunicable disease (NCD) strategy, data on health perceptions and behaviours are critical to designing and tailoring interventions to slow rising NCD prevalence and the toll on public health and economic well-being. Intervention planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation require understanding the relevant public's sense of personal risk, prevention awareness, and willingness to undertake preventative measures, as well as structural barriers impeding engagement in healthy behaviours, seeking treatment, and managing illness. This article details the design features and challenges of a study focused on the aforementioned features in Chennai, India. These features and challenges have relevance across Asia. As such, communication and collaboration between Asian researchers and program planners can enrich results for all involved. Establishing such a forum should be high on Asia's global health agenda.

Published
2010
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results