Suchergebnisse

AbstractAdolescents continue to be exposed to alcohol marketing, despite the existence of alcohol control policies in Sri Lanka. National‐level policies restrict all forms of alcohol advertising, promotions, and sponsorship and sale to minors. The act calls for the need to protect children and adolescents from exposure to the harm of alcohol. This article investigates stakeholders' perceptions of the alcohol marketing policy environment in Sri Lanka, with a specific focus on policies designed to prevent or curtail adolescent drinking. Between May and July 2019, in‐depth interviews were conducted with policy stakeholders in Colombo, Sri Lanka. Thematic analysis was conducted on the audio‐recorded interviews that were transcribed and translated and imported to NVivo12. Fifteen policy stakeholders from government and nongovernment organizations participated in this study. The overarching theme identified a lukewarm alcohol marketing policy environment. This situation was facilitated by the alcohol industry acting as the vector, an amber light approach towards public health programs, and other factors contributing to the perceived ineffectiveness of the alcohol marketing policy environment. A unified public health approach supported by policy and political commitment may pave the way for better alcohol control in Sri Lanka.

Aotearoa/New Zealand (Aotearoa/NZ) and the United States (U.S.) suffer inequities in health outcomes by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. This paper compares both countries' approaches to health equity to inform policy efforts. We developed a conceptual model that highlights how government and private policies influence health equity by impacting the healthcare system (access to care, structure and quality of care, payment of care), and integration of healthcare system with social services. These policies are shaped by each country's culture, history, and values. Aotearoa/NZ and U.S. share strong aspirational goals for health equity in their national health strategy documents. Unfortunately, implemented policies are frequently not explicit in how they address health inequities, and often do not align with evidence-based approaches known to improve equity. To authentically commit to achieving health equity, nations should: 1) Explicitly design quality of care and payment policies to achieve equity, holding the healthcare system accountable through public monitoring and evaluation, and supporting with adequate resources; 2) Address all determinants of health for individuals and communities with coordinated approaches, integrated funding streams, and shared accountability metrics across health and social sectors; 3) Share power authentically with racial/ethnic minorities and promote indigenous peoples' self-determination; 4) Have free, frank, and fearless discussions about impacts of structural racism, colonialism, and white privilege, ensuring that policies and programmes explicitly address root causes.

Background: To advance active transport, robust policy-relevant evidence is needed to understand how to change behaviour and to support decision-making by policy makers and practitioners. Currently, however, priority research questions that are most critical for advancing active transport have not been identified. To this end, we aimed to inform an active transport research priority agenda for Australia to guide research, funding, policy making and practice to enhance active transport. Methods: We designed and conducted a novel priority setting exercise to identify and set research priorities for the advancement of active transport in Australia. The process consisted of three phases: 1) generation and collection of research questions from a diverse reference group consisting of experts and key members representing academia, government, private and not-for-profit organisations (n = 259 respondents); 2) thematic analysis and consolidation of research questions to a final list of 50 questions; and 3) prioritisation of research questions by the reference group (n = 140 respondents). Results: The top ranked questions included the evidence to support policy changes to increase active transport, identifying and overcoming community resistance to active transport infrastructure, road space re-allocation and lower urban speed limits, evidence on the needs of children, enhanced governance and funding, and improving how the benefits of active transport are best measured and communicated. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first priority setting exercise in active transport globally. The identified research priorities can be used to identify new policy-relevant areas of research, contribute to the active transport research agenda in Australia and guide research funding. Focusing on these research priorities will address stakeholder and academic priorities and provide the evidence required to support the advancement of active transport in Australia. Future research could use the same approach to identify research ...

This article reviews theoretical and practical approaches for setting priorities in global child health research investments. It also provides an overview of previous attempts to develop appropriate tools and methodologies to define priorities in health research investments. A brief review of the most important theoretical concepts that should govern priority setting processes is undertaken, showing how different perspectives, such as medical, economical, legal, ethical, social, political, rational, philosophical, stakeholder driven, and others will necessarily conflict each other in determining priorities. We specially address present research agenda in global child health today and how it relates to United Nation's (UN) Millennium Development Goal 4, which is to reduce child mortality by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015. The outcomes of these former approaches are evaluated and their benefits and shortcomings presented. The case for a new methodology for setting priorities in health research investments is presented, as proposed by Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, and a need for its implementation in global child health is outlined. A transdisciplinary approach is needed to address all the perspectives from which investments into health research can be seen as priorities. This prioritization requires a process that is transparent, systematic, and that would take into account many perspectives and build on advantages of previous approaches.

This article provides detailed guidelines for the implementation of systematic method for setting priorities in health research investments that was recently developed by Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI). The target audience for the proposed method are international agencies, large research funding donors, and national governments and policy-makers. The process has the following steps: (i) selecting the managers of the process; (ii) specifying the context and risk management preferences; (iii) discussing criteria for setting health research priorities; (iv) choosing a limited set of the most useful and important criteria; (v) developing means to assess the likelihood that proposed health research options will satisfy the selected criteria; (vi) systematic listing of a large number of proposed health research options; (vii) pre-scoring check of all competing health research options; (viii) scoring of health research options using the chosen set of criteria; (ix) calculating intermediate scores for each health research option; (x) obtaining further input from the stakeholders; (xi) adjusting intermediate scores taking into account the values of stakeholders; (xii) calculating overall priority scores and assigning ranks; (xiii) performing an analysis of agreement between the scorers; (xiv) linking computed research priority scores with investment decisions; (xv) feedback and revision. The CHNRI method is a flexible process that enables prioritizing health research investments at any level: institutional, regional, national, international, or global.