Comparing priority received by global health issues

A measurement framework applied to tuberculosis, malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever

Dados Bibliográficos

ID21880989
AutoresRakesh Parashar (0000-0002-2428-8622, National Health Systems Resource Centre, autor correspondente), Sharmishtha Nanda (0000-0001-7080-0677, Independent Consultant, Delhi, India), Stephanie L Smith (0000-0003-2987-6252, Virginia Tech), Zubin Cyrus Shroff (0000-0002-0582-8582, Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research), Yusra Ribhi Shawar (0000-0002-9539-0341, Johns Hopkins University), Dereck L Hamunakwadi (Virginia Tech), Joseph Shiffman (0000-0002-1693-4671, Johns Hopkins University)
Ano2024
Volume9
Fascículo7
Páginase014884
Data de publicação2024-07-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoBMJ Global Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908
EditoraBMJ (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014884
PMID38977402
OpenAlexW4400476672
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas2
Referências citadas23

INTRODUCTION: The relative priority received by issues in global health agendas is subjected to impressionistic claims in the absence of objective methods of assessment of priority. To build an approach for conducting structured assessments of comparative priority health issues receive, we expand the public arenas model (2021) and offer a framework for future assessments of health issue priority in global and national health agendas. METHODS: We aimed to develop a more comprehensive set of measures for conducting multiyear priority comparisons of health issues in six agenda-setting arenas by identifying possible measures and data sources, selecting indicators based on feasibility and comparability of measures and gathering the data on selected indicators. We applied these measures to four communicable diseases-tuberculosis (TB), malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever-given their differing impressionistic claims of priority. Where possible, we analysed the annual and/or 5-year trends from 2000 through 2022. RESULTS: We observed that TB and malaria received the highest priority for most periods in the past two decades in most arenas. However, a stagnation in development funding for these two conditions over the last 8-10 years may have fuelled the neglect claims. Despite having a higher disease burden, diarrhoea has been slipping in global priority with reduced spending, fewer clinical trials and stagnating publications. Dengue remains a low-priority condition but has witnessed a sharp rise in attention from the pharmaceutical industry. DISCUSSIONS: We expanded the arenas model by including a transnational arena (international representation) and additional measurements for various arenas. This analysis presents an approach to enable comparative trend analysis of the markers of agenda status over a multiyear period. More such analyses can bring much-desired objectivity in understanding how attention to global or national health issues changes over time in different arenas, potentiating a more equitable allocation of resources

Communicable disease · Comparability · Dengue fever · Disability-adjusted life year · Disease burden · Environmental health · Global health · Malaria · Population · Public health · Sanitation · Tuberculosis · Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Medicine · Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research · Health Policy