Youth engagement in research and policy: The CO-CREATE framework to optimize power balance and mitigate risks of conflicts of interest.

Including youth in the co-creation of policies that affect them has proven to be particularly impactful in public health. Using youth participatory action research methods, the CO-CREATE project engages European youth 16-18 years old in the co-creation of obesity prevention policies. To discuss the feasibility and implications of the policy, youth are invited to engage in an intergenerational dialogue. Given the youth-adult dynamic and policy discussion, conflicts of interests (COIs) can arise and impact the quality of the dialogue. COI frameworks are a tool that can help identify, mitigate, and address COIs. This paper presents a novel framework to mitigate COIs in intergenerational policy dialogues, with a focus on power imbalance. Following a series of youth consultations, interviews, and examination of existing frameworks, our findings suggest that safe, participatory, and empowering dialogues can take place if appropriate measures are integrated into all phases of a dialogue. The selection of stakeholders, use of accessible language, and youth moderation are all factors that can impact COI risks. Measures that promote mutual empowerment, such as equal representation of youth and adults, were deemed important. This framework provides a roadmap to ensure that youth participation in the formulation of policies is safe and empowering.

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Pandemic preparedness and response: exploring the role of universal health coverage within the global health security architecture.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, several international initiatives have been developed to strengthen and reform the global architecture for pandemic preparedness and response, including proposals for a pandemic treaty, a Pandemic Fund, and mechanisms for equitable access to medical countermeasures. These initiatives seek to make use of crucial lessons gleaned from the ongoing pandemic by addressing gaps in health security and traditional public health functions. However, there has been insufficient consideration of the vital role of universal health coverage in sustainably mitigating outbreaks, and the importance of robust primary health care in equitably and efficiently safeguarding communities from future health threats. The international community should not repeat the mistakes of past health security efforts that ultimately contributed to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and disproportionately affected vulnerable and marginalised populations, especially by overlooking the importance of coherent, multisectoral health systems. This Health Policy paper outlines major (although often neglected) gaps in pandemic preparedness and response, which are applicable to broader health emergency preparedness and response efforts, and identifies opportunities to reconceptualise health security by scaling up universal health coverage. We then offer a comprehensive set of recommendations to help inform the development of key pandemic preparedness and response proposals across three themes-governance, financing, and supporting initiatives. By identifying approaches that simultaneously strengthen health systems through global health security and universal health coverage, we aim to provide tangible solutions that equitably meet the needs of all communities while ensuring resilience to future pandemic threats.

How an outbreak became a pandemic: a chronological analysis of crucial junctures and international obligations in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Understanding the spread of SARS-CoV-2, how and when evidence emerged, and the timing of local, national, regional, and global responses is essential to establish how an outbreak became a pandemic and to prepare for future health threats. With that aim, the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response has developed a chronology of events, actions, and recommendations, from December, 2019, when the first cases of COVID-19 were identified in China, to the end of March, 2020, by which time the outbreak had spread extensively worldwide and had been characterised as a pandemic. Datapoints are based on two literature reviews, WHO documents and correspondence, submissions to the Panel, and an expert verification process. The retrospective analysis of the chronology shows a dedicated initial response by WHO and some national governments, but also aspects of the response that could have been quicker, including outbreak notifications under the International Health Regulations (IHR), presumption and confirmation of human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2, declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and, most importantly, the public health response of many national governments. The chronology also shows that some countries, largely those with previous experience with similar outbreaks, reacted quickly, even ahead of WHO alerts, and were more successful in initially containing the virus. Mapping actions against IHR obligations, the chronology shows where efficiency and accountability could be improved at local, national, and international levels to more quickly alert and contain health threats in the future. In particular, these improvements include necessary reforms to international law and governance for pandemic preparedness and response, including the IHR and a potential framework convention on pandemic preparedness and response.

Health systems resilience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from 28 countries.

Health systems resilience is key to learning lessons from country responses to crises such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this perspective, we review COVID-19 responses in 28 countries using a new health systems resilience framework. Through a combination of literature review, national government submissions and interviews with experts, we conducted a comparative analysis of national responses. We report on domains addressing governance and financing, health workforce, medical products and technologies, public health functions, health service delivery and community engagement to prevent and mitigate the spread of COVID-19. We then synthesize four salient elements that underlie highly effective national responses and offer recommendations toward strengthening health systems resilience globally.

Primary health care and nutrition.

Globally, dietary factors are responsible for about one in five deaths. In many low- and middle-income countries different forms of malnutrition (including obesity and undernutrition) can co-exist within the same population. This double burden of malnutrition is placing a disproportional strain on health systems, slowing progress towards universal health coverage (UHC). Poor nutrition also impedes the growth of local economies, ultimately affecting the global economy. In this article, we argue that comprehensive primary health care should be used as a platform to address the double burden of malnutrition. We use a conceptual framework based on human rights and the Astana Declaration on primary health care to examine existing recommendations and propose guidance on how policy-makers and providers of community-oriented primary health care can strengthen the role of nutrition within the UHC agenda. Specifically, we propose four thematic areas for action: (i) bridging narratives and strengthening links between the primary health care and the nutrition agenda with nutrition as a human rights issue; (ii) encouraging primary health-care providers to support local multisectoral action on nutrition; (iii) empowering communities and patients to address unhealthy diets; and (iv) ensuring the delivery of high-quality promotive, preventive, curative and rehabilitative nutrition interventions. For each theme we summarize the available strategies, policies and interventions that can be used by primary health-care providers and policy-makers to strengthen nutrition in primary health care and thus the UHC agenda.

Environ un décès sur cinq dans le monde est dû à des facteurs alimentaires. Dans de nombreux pays à faible et moyen revenu, différentes formes de malnutrition (y compris l'obésité et la dénutrition) peuvent coexister au sein d'une même population. Ce double fardeau de malnutrition exerce une pression démesurée sur les systèmes de santé, ralentissant la progression vers une couverture maladie universelle (CMU). Une mauvaise alimentation entrave également la croissance des économies locales, ce qui en fin de compte affecte l'économie mondiale. Dans cet article, nous estimons qu'il est impératif d'utiliser une approche globale des soins de santé primaires comme plateforme pour s'attaquer au double fardeau de la malnutrition. Nous avons employé un cadre conceptuel fondé sur les droits humains et la Déclaration d'Astana sur les soins de santé primaires. D'une part pour examiner les recommandations existantes, et d'autre part pour fournir un éclairage sur la manière dont les législateurs et les prestataires de soins de santé primaires, implantés au niveau communautaire, peuvent renforcer le rôle de la nutrition dans le programme de CMU. Nous proposons plus exactement quatre champs d'action : (i) aligner les discours et consolider les liens entre les soins de santé primaires et le programme de nutrition, en intégrant ce dernier dans la thématique des droits humains; (ii) encourager les prestataires de soins de santé primaires à soutenir les initiatives locales multisectorielles portant sur la nutrition; (iii) donner aux patients et aux collectivités le pouvoir de lutter contre l'alimentation déséquilibrée; et enfin, (iv) assurer la mise en œuvre d'interventions de qualité pour la promotion, la prévention, le traitement et la réhabilitation en matière de nutrition. Pour chaque champ d'action, nous résumons les stratégies, politiques et interventions à la disposition des législateurs et prestataires de soins de santé primaires pour renforcer le rôle de la nutrition dans les soins de santé primaires et, par conséquent, le programme de CMU.

Los factores alimentarios son responsables de aproximadamente una de cada cinco muertes en todo el mundo. Diferentes tipos de malnutrición (incluidas la obesidad y la desnutrición) pueden coexistir en la misma población de muchos países de ingresos bajos y medios. Esta doble carga de la malnutrición está ejerciendo una presión desproporcionada sobre los sistemas sanitarios, lo que ralentiza los progresos hacia la cobertura sanitaria universal (CSU). Además, la mala nutrición dificulta el crecimiento de las economías locales, lo que en última instancia afecta a la economía global. En este artículo, se argumenta que la atención primaria de salud integral se debería utilizar como plataforma para abordar la doble carga de la malnutrición. Se utiliza un marco conceptual basado en los derechos humanos y en la Declaración de Astaná sobre la atención primaria de salud para analizar las recomendaciones existentes y proponer directrices sobre cómo los responsables de formular las políticas y los proveedores de atención primaria de salud orientada a la comunidad pueden fortalecer la función de la nutrición dentro del programa de la CSU. En concreto, se proponen cuatro áreas temáticas de acción: (i) narrativas de vinculación y fortalecimiento de los vínculos entre la atención primaria de salud y el programa de nutrición en donde la nutrición sea una cuestión de derechos humanos; (ii) alentar a los proveedores de atención primaria de salud a que apoyen la medida multisectorial local sobre la nutrición; (iii) potenciar a las comunidades y a los pacientes para tratar las dietas poco saludables; y (iv) garantizar la realización de intervenciones de nutrición de alta calidad de tipo promocional, preventivo, curativo y de rehabilitación. Para cada tema se resumen las estrategias, políticas e intervenciones disponibles que los proveedores de atención primaria de salud y los responsables de formular las políticas pueden utilizar para fortalecer la nutrición en la atención primaria de salud y, por consiguiente, el programa de la CSU.