Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 74
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
J Int AIDS Soc ; 24(12): e25846, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591262

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: While pregnant people have been an important focus for HIV research, critical evidence gaps remain regarding prevention, co-infection, and safety and efficacy of new antiretroviral therapies in pregnancy. Such gaps can result in harm: without safety data, drugs used may carry unacceptable risks to the foetus or pregnant person; without pregnancy-specific dosing data, pregnant people face risks of both toxicity and undertreatment; and delays in gathering evidence can limit access to beneficial next-generation drugs. Despite recognition of the need, numerous barriers and ethical complexities have limited progress. We describe the process, ethical foundations, recommendations and applications of guidance for advancing responsible inclusion of pregnant people in HIV/co-infections research. DISCUSSION: The 26-member international and interdisciplinary Pregnancy and HIV/AIDS: Seeking Equitable Study (PHASES) Working Group was convened to develop ethics-centred guidance for advancing timely, responsible HIV/co-infections research with pregnant people. Deliberations over 3 years drew on extensive qualitative research, stakeholder engagement, expert consultation and a series of workshops. The guidance, initially issued in July 2020, highlights conceptual shifts needed in framing research with pregnant people, and articulates three ethical foundations to ground recommendations: equitable protection from drug-related risks, timely access to biomedical advances and equitable respect for pregnant people's health interests. The guidance advances 12 specific recommendations, actionable within the current regulatory environment, addressing multiple stakeholders across drug development and post-approval research, and organized around four themes: building capacity, supporting inclusion, achieving priority research and ensuring respect. The recommendations describe strategies towards ethically redressing the evidence gap for pregnant people around HIV and co-infections. The guidance has informed key efforts of leading organizations working to advance needed research, and identifies further opportunities for impact by a range of stakeholder groups. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear pathways towards ethical inclusion of pregnant people in the biomedical research agenda, and strong agreement across the HIV research community about the need for - and the promise of - advancing them. Those who fund, conduct, oversee and advocate for research can use the PHASES guidance to facilitate more, better and earlier evidence to optimize the health and wellbeing of pregnant people and their children.


Subject(s)
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome , Biomedical Research , Coinfection , HIV Infections , Child , Female , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Pregnancy , Stakeholder Participation
2.
Int J Palliat Nurs ; 27(8): 410-416, 2021 Oct 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481214

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mutually respectful and long-term global partnerships are critical to increasing hospice and palliative care access as a key component of universal health coverage. The importance of sustained, transnational palliative care collaboration has become more urgent since the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: To provide an overview of characteristics for successful global palliative nursing partnerships. METHOD: The authors highlight the need to adapt approaches to meet the challenges and demands of COVID-19 in both clinical and academic spaces. Exemplars of thriving global partnerships are provided, alongside palliative nursing considerations and strategies to advance and sustain them. CONCLUSION: The role of nursing to drive and enhance palliative care partnerships, especially with equitable input from low- and middle-income country stakeholders, must be leveraged to advance shared goals and reduce serious health-related suffering around the world.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Global Health , Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing/methods , Stakeholder Participation , Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing/trends , Humans , Internationality , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(8): 1151-1158, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481184

ABSTRACT

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Drug Approval , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Interprofessional Relations , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation , United States
4.
Fam Med Community Health ; 9(3)2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1476699

ABSTRACT

Although low-income countries have recently seen an exponential flourishing of digital health initiatives, the landscape is characterised by a myriad of small pilots that rarely reach scaling, sustainability and wide adoption. The case of Burkina Faso represents an exception where a digital health initiative initially conceived to improve the diagnosis of sick children under 5 has supported millions of consultations. Technical aspects such as interoperability, standardisation, and adaptation to the existing infrastructure were considered as they are prerequisites for scaling; so was the demonstration of the health impact and affordability of the initiative. Beyond those factors which are largely documented in the literature, the experience in Burkina Faso showed that the positive outcome was also determined by the support of numerous stakeholders. A vast network of stakeholders from the Ministry of Health to child caregivers is involved and each of them could have either blocked or promoted the digital health initiative. Thanks to an extensive, time-consuming and tailored stakeholder strategy, it was possible to avoid potential blockages from multiple actors and gain their engagement.


Subject(s)
Caregivers , Stakeholder Participation , Burkina Faso , Child , Family , Humans , Referral and Consultation
5.
PLoS Med ; 18(9): e1003788, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470658

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions to address the healthcare delivery gap that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process. While social innovations for health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovation. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The research checklist was developed through a 3-step community-engaged process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a 3-round modified Delphi process. The call for entries solicited checklists and related items and was open between November 27, 2019 and February 1, 2020. In addition to the open call submissions and scoping review findings, a 17-item Social Innovation For Health Research (SIFHR) Checklist was developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist. The checklist was then refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys conducted between May and June 2020. The resulting checklist will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting, increase end-user engagement, and help assess social innovation projects. A limitation of the open call was requiring internet access, which likely discouraged participation of some subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The SIFHR Checklist will strengthen the reporting of social innovation for health research studies. More research is needed on social innovation for health.


Subject(s)
Checklist , Health Services Research , Research Design , Socioeconomic Factors , Delphi Technique , Diffusion of Innovation , Humans , Social Determinants of Health , Stakeholder Participation
6.
FASEB J ; 35(11): e21973, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462504

ABSTRACT

Contemporary science has become increasingly multi-disciplinary and team-based, resulting in unprecedented growth in biomedical innovation and technology over the last several decades. Collaborative research efforts have enabled investigators to respond to the demands of an increasingly complex 21st century landscape, including pressing scientific challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic. A major contributing factor to the success of team science is the mobilization of core facilities and shared research resources (SRRs), the scientific instrumentation and expertise that exist within research organizations that enable widespread access to advanced technologies for trainees, faculty, and staff. For over 40 years, SRRs have played a key role in accelerating biomedical research discoveries, yet a national strategy that addresses how to leverage these resources to enhance team science and achieve shared scientific goals is noticeably absent. We believe a national strategy for biomedical SRRs-led by the National Institutes of Health-is crucial to advance key national initiatives, enable long-term research efficiency, and provide a solid foundation for the next generation of scientists.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/organization & administration , COVID-19 , Intersectoral Collaboration , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)/organization & administration , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Academies and Institutes/organization & administration , Career Mobility , Congresses as Topic , Humans , Policy , Program Evaluation , Research Support as Topic , Societies, Scientific/organization & administration , Stakeholder Participation , United States , Universities/organization & administration
7.
CMAJ Open ; 9(3): E848-E854, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1399642

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: When vaccine supplies are anticipated to be limited, necessitating the vaccination of certain groups earlier than others, the assessment of values and preferences of stakeholders is an important component of an ethically sound vaccine prioritization framework. The objective of this study was to conduct a priority-setting exercise to establish an expert stakeholder perspective on the relative importance of COVID-19 vaccination strategies in Canada. METHODS: The priority-setting exercise included a survey of stakeholders that was conducted from July 22 to Aug. 14, 2020. Stakeholders included clinical and public health expert groups, provincial and territorial committees and national Indigenous groups, patient and community advocacy representatives and experts, health professional associations and federal government departments. Survey results were analyzed to identify trends. RESULTS: Of 155 stakeholders contacted, 76 surveys were received for a participation rate of 49%. During a period of anticipated initial vaccine scarcity for all pandemic scenarios, stakeholders generally considered the most important vaccination strategy to be protecting those who are most vulnerable to severe illness and death from COVID-19. This was followed in importance by strategies to protect health care capacity, minimize transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and protect critical infrastructure. INTERPRETATION: This priority-setting exercise established that there is general alignment in the values and preferences across stakeholder groups: the most important vaccination strategy at the time of limited initial vaccine availability is to protect those who are most vulnerable. The findings of this priority-setting exercise provided a timely expert perspective to guide early public health planning for COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Priorities/ethics , Vaccination/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Canada/epidemiology , Capacity Building/organization & administration , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Health Occupations/statistics & numerical data , Health Occupations/trends , Health Priorities/organization & administration , Humans , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Severity of Illness Index , Stakeholder Participation , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vulnerable Populations
8.
J Int AIDS Soc ; 24(9): e25781, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384195

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected antiretroviral therapy (ART) continuity among people living with HIV (PLHIV) worldwide. We conducted a qualitative study to explore barriers to ART maintenance and solutions to ART interruption when stringent COVID-19 control measures were implemented in China, from the perspective of PLHIV and relevant key stakeholders. METHODS: Between 11 February and 15 February 2020, we interviewed PLHIV, community-based organization (CBO) workers, staff from centres for disease control and prevention (CDC) at various levels whose work is relevant to HIV care (CDC staff), HIV doctors and nurses and drug vendors from various regions in China. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using a messaging and social media app. Challenges and responses relevant to ART continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic were discussed. Themes were identified by transcript coding and mindmaps. RESULTS: Sixty-four stakeholders were recruited, including 16 PLHIV, 17 CBO workers, 15 CDC staff, 14 HIV doctors and nurses and two drug vendors. Many CDC staff, HIV doctors and nurses responsible for ART delivery and HIV care were shifted to COVID-19 response efforts. Barriers to ART maintenance were (a) travel restrictions, (b) inadequate communication and bureaucratic obstacles, (c) shortage in personnel, (d) privacy concerns, and (e) insufficient ART reserve. CBO helped PLHIV maintain access to ART through five solutions identified from thematic analysis: (a) coordination to refill ART from local CDC clinics or hospitals, (b) delivery of ART by mail, (c) privacy protection measures, (d) mental health counselling, and (e) providing connections to alternative sources of ART. Drug vendors contributed to ART maintenance by selling out-of-pocket ART. CONCLUSIONS: Social and institutional disruption from COVID-19 contributed to increased risk of ART interruption among PLHIV in China. Collaboration among key stakeholders was needed to maintain access to ART, with CBO playing an important role. Other countries facing ART interruption during current or future public health emergencies may learn from the solutions employed in China.


Subject(s)
Anti-Retroviral Agents/supply & distribution , Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active/methods , COVID-19 , Continuity of Patient Care , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Health Services Accessibility , Adult , Anti-Retroviral Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , China/epidemiology , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/psychology , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation
9.
Acad Med ; 96(7): 954-957, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1364834

ABSTRACT

Machine learning (ML) algorithms are powerful prediction tools with immense potential in the clinical setting. There are a number of existing clinical tools that use ML, and many more are in development. Physicians are important stakeholders in the health care system, but most are not equipped to make informed decisions regarding deployment and application of ML technologies in patient care. It is of paramount importance that ML concepts are integrated into medical curricula to position physicians to become informed consumers of the emerging tools employing ML. This paradigm shift is similar to the evidence-based medicine (EBM) movement of the 1990s. At that time, EBM was a novel concept; now, EBM is considered an essential component of medical curricula and critical to the provision of high-quality patient care. ML has the potential to have a similar, if not greater, impact on the practice of medicine. As this technology continues its inexorable march forward, educators must continue to evaluate medical curricula to ensure that physicians are trained to be informed stakeholders in the health care of tomorrow.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Education, Medical/methods , Evidence-Based Medicine/history , Machine Learning/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Algorithms , COVID-19 Testing/instrumentation , Clinical Decision-Making/ethics , Clinical Trials as Topic , Curriculum/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Diabetic Retinopathy/diagnosis , Diagnostic Imaging/instrumentation , Female , History, 20th Century , Humans , Liability, Legal , Male , Physician-Patient Relations/ethics , Physicians/organization & administration , Stakeholder Participation , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence
11.
Ann Glob Health ; 87(1): 66, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1325925

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Partnerships are essential to creating effective global health leadership training programs. Global pandemics, including the HIV/AIDS pandemic, and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic, have tested the impact and stability of healthcare systems. Partnerships must be fostered to prepare the next generation of leaders to collaborate effectively and improve health globally. Objectives: We provide key matrices that predict success of partnerships in building global health leadership capacity. We highlight opportunities and challenges to building effective partnerships and provide recommendations to promote development of equitable and mutually beneficial partnerships. Findings: Critical elements for effective partnership when building global health leadership capacity include shared strategic vision, transparency and excellent communication, as well as intentional monitoring and evaluation of the partnership, not just the project or program. There must be recognition that partnerships can be unpredictable and unequal, especially if the end is not defined early on. Threats to equitable and effective partnerships include funding and co-funding disparities between partners from high-income and low-income countries, inequalities, unshared vision and priorities, skewed decision-making levels, and limited flexibility to minimize inequalities and make changes. Further, imbalances in power, privilege, position, income levels, and institutional resources create opportunities for exploitation of partners, particularly those in low-income countries, which widens the disparities and limits success and sustainability of partnerships. These challenges to effective partnering create the need for objective documentation of disparities at all stages, with key milestones to assess success and the environment to sustain the partnerships and their respective goals. Conclusions: Developing effective and sustainable partnerships requires a commitment to equality from the start by all partners and an understanding that there will be challenges that could derail otherwise well-intended partnerships. Guidelines and training on evaluation of partnerships exist and should be used, including generic indicators of equity, mutual benefit, and the added value of partnering. Key Takeaways: Effective partnerships in building global health leadership capacity require shared strategic vision and intentional monitoring and evaluation of goalsInequalities in partnerships may arise from disparities in infrastructure, managerial expertise, administrative and leadership capacity, as well as limited mutual benefit and mutual respectTo promote equitable and effective partnerships, it is critical to highlight and monitor key measures for success of partnerships at the beginning of each partnership and regularly through the lifetime of the partnership.We recommend that partnerships should have legal and financial laws through executed memoranda of understanding, to promote accountability and facilitate objective monitoring and evaluation of the partnership itself.More research is needed to understand better the contextual predictors of the broader influence and sustainability of partnership networks in global health leadership training.


Subject(s)
Global Health , International Cooperation , Leadership , Public-Private Sector Partnerships/organization & administration , Communication , Humans , Program Development/methods , Program Evaluation/methods , Stakeholder Participation
12.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(7): e23779, 2021 07 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1325489

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The combination of the internet and healthcare has excellent benefits and far-reaching positive effects in improving service efficiency and promoting social equity. The role of the "internet plus healthcare" (IPHC) has been recognized, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. This new healthcare model is also familiar to people and shows a bright prospect. OBJECTIVE: This article seeks to accurately understand and fully grasp the characteristics of IPHC policies that can enlighten the formulation of future policies. METHODS: The content analysis method was used to analyze China's IPHC policies collected from the Beida Fabao database and several official websites. RESULTS: We found that the development of IPHC policy has gone through 4 stages and is currently entering a phase of rapid development. IPHC policymakers are primarily health administrative departments. In addition, policy instruments are classified into either supply, environment, or demand, and policy themes can be summarized into 4 categories: facilities, technology, service, and management. CONCLUSIONS: China's IPHC policy has good prospects from the perspective of development trends. The health administrative departments mainly lead the development of China's IPHC policy. It is suggested that these departments involve other stakeholders (ie, medical workers, medical industries, and technology sectors) in formulating policies. Policies prefer to use supply-based and environment-based policy instruments. The policy themes emphasize improving infrastructure construction and high-quality diagnostic and treatment services, strengthening the supporting role of information technology, and ensuring all stakeholders understand their responsibilities.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Health Policy , Internet-Based Intervention , COVID-19/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation
13.
Healthc Q ; 24(2): 33-37, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323455

ABSTRACT

Physician engagement is an important factor in improving care quality and patient safety, but engaging physicians is not easy. Winston Churchill's famous assertion about never wasting a crisis has defined the approach taken by many leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper describes three case studies of successful physician engagement across the continuum of acute care, chronic care and primary care settings during the pandemic. These examples offer insights on physician engagement within unique settings by leveraging intrinsic motivators and Spurgeon's model of medical engagement.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Physicians/organization & administration , Stakeholder Participation , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/organization & administration , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Organizational Case Studies , Primary Health Care/organization & administration
14.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(9): e29310, 2021 09 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323049

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the world faced the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), medical professionals, technologists, community leaders, and policy makers sought to understand how best to leverage data for public health surveillance and community education. With this complex public health problem, North Carolinians relied on data from state, federal, and global health organizations to increase their understanding of the pandemic and guide decision-making. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the role that stakeholders involved in COVID-19-related data played in managing the pandemic in North Carolina. The study investigated the processes used by organizations throughout the state in using, collecting, and reporting COVID-19 data. METHODS: We used an exploratory qualitative study design to investigate North Carolina's COVID-19 data collection efforts. To better understand these processes, key informant interviews were conducted with employees from organizations that collected COVID-19 data across the state. We developed an interview guide, and open-ended semistructured interviews were conducted during the period from June through November 2020. Interviews lasted between 30 and 45 minutes and were conducted by data scientists by videoconference. Data were subsequently analyzed using qualitative data analysis software. RESULTS: Results indicated that electronic health records were primary sources of COVID-19 data. Often, data were also used to create dashboards to inform the public or other health professionals, to aid in decision-making, or for reporting purposes. Cross-sector collaboration was cited as a major success. Consistency among metrics and data definitions, data collection processes, and contact tracing were cited as challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that, during future outbreaks, organizations across regions could benefit from data centralization and data governance. Data should be publicly accessible and in a user-friendly format. Additionally, established cross-sector collaboration networks are demonstrably beneficial for public health professionals across the state as these established relationships facilitate a rapid response to evolving public health challenges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Data Analysis , Data Collection , Pandemics/prevention & control , Stakeholder Participation/psychology , Female , Health Education , Humans , Male , North Carolina/epidemiology , Public Health Surveillance , Qualitative Research
15.
Nat Rev Nephrol ; 17(8): 554-568, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319029

ABSTRACT

Although overall donation and transplantation activity is higher in Europe than on other continents, differences between European countries in almost every aspect of transplantation activity (for example, in the number of transplantations, the number of people with a functioning graft, in rates of living versus deceased donation, and in the use of expanded criteria donors) suggest that there is ample room for improvement. Herein we review the policy and clinical measures that should be considered to increase access to transplantation and improve post-transplantation outcomes. This Roadmap, generated by a group of major European stakeholders collaborating within a Thematic Network, presents an outline of the challenges to increasing transplantation rates and proposes 12 key areas along with specific measures that should be considered to promote transplantation. This framework can be adopted by countries and institutions that are interested in advancing transplantation, both within and outside the European Union. Within this framework, a priority ranking of initiatives is suggested that could serve as the basis for a new European Union Action Plan on Organ Donation and Transplantation.


Subject(s)
Organ Transplantation , Tissue and Organ Procurement , Europe/epidemiology , European Union , Humans , Kidney Transplantation/statistics & numerical data , Organ Transplantation/statistics & numerical data , Stakeholder Participation , Tissue and Organ Procurement/organization & administration , Tissue and Organ Procurement/statistics & numerical data , Waiting Lists/mortality
16.
BMJ Open ; 11(7): e049611, 2021 07 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1304230

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: As the world continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging evidence suggests that individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds may be disproportionately affected. The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) project has been initiated to generate rapid evidence on whether and why ethnicity affects COVID-19 diagnosis and clinical outcomes in healthcare workers (HCWs) in the UK, through five interlinked work packages/work streams, three of which form the basis of this protocol. The ethico-legal work (Work Package 3) aims to understand and address legal, ethical and acceptability issues around big data research; the HCWs' experiences study (Work Package 4) explores their work and personal experiences, perceptions of risk, support and coping mechanisms; the stakeholder engagement work (Work Package 5) aims to provide feedback and support with the formulation and dissemination of the project recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Work Package 3 has two different research strands: (A) desk-based doctrinal research; and (B) empirical qualitative research with key opinion leaders. For the empirical research, in-depth interviews will be conducted digitally and recorded with participants' permission. Recordings will be transcribed, coded and analysed using thematic analysis. In Work Package 4, online in-depth interviews and focus groups will be conducted with approximately 150 HCWs, from across the UK, and these will be recorded with participants' consent. The recordings will be transcribed and coded and data will be analysed using thematic analysis. Work Package 5 will achieve its objectives through regular group meetings and in-group discussions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been received from the London-Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee of the Health Research Authority (Ref No 20/HRA/4718). Results of the study will be published in open-access journals, and disseminated through conference presentations, project website, stakeholder organisations, media and scientific advisory groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11811602.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Health Personnel , Humans , London , Minority Groups , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation , United Kingdom
17.
Pharmaceut Med ; 35(4): 197-202, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1293483

ABSTRACT

The medical affairs function represents one of the scientific interfaces in a pharmaceutical organization. Over the last two decades, medical affairs has evolved from being a support function to a strategic pillar within organizational business units. The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to unforeseen circumstances resulting in a dramatic change in external stakeholder engagements, catapulting the medical affairs function into leading the way on scientific engagements and patient-centric endeavors. The changes in stakeholder interactions and behavior as a result of the pandemic last year are likely to persist in the foreseeable future for which medical affairs professionals need to enhance existing skill sets and acquire expertise in newer domains. In this paper, the transformation of the medical affairs team to a key strategic partner and the skills required to strengthen this transition, in the next normal of a post-COVID world, is explored.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Drug Development/trends , Drug Industry/trends , Stakeholder Participation , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Drug Development/organization & administration , Drug Development/standards , Drug Industry/organization & administration , Drug Industry/standards , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Humans , India , Pandemics/prevention & control
19.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 147(6): 576-577, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1289743
20.
J Appl Psychol ; 106(6): 811-824, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275873

ABSTRACT

Whereas many workplaces shut down following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many others in essential industries had to remain operational, thus exposing their employees to COVID-19's inherent dangers. These firms were pressed to take immediate action to protect their employees' safety and financial well-being. However, firms varied considerably in the degree to which they took action, and stakeholders appeared to take notice. Leveraging attribution theory, we build theory around the impact of firm actions to protect employee safety and compensation on stakeholder sentiment toward the firm. We further examined how firm leadership helped shape stakeholder sentiment by theorizing about the joint impact of actions with Chief Executive Officer (CEO) benevolence. We built a unique, multisourced data set and tested our theory on a sample of public firms in the consumer staples sector. Our longitudinal analysis of positive stakeholder sentiment expressed on social media demonstrated the importance of these immediate firm actions on sentiment in the initial months of the pandemic. Specifically, firm compensation actions were associated with a growth in positive sentiment over these months, particularly when made by CEOs with high benevolence, whereas firm safety actions led to growth in positive sentiment but only when made by CEOs with low benevolence. We discuss the implications of these findings for our understanding of firm actions and leadership at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Beneficence , COVID-19/prevention & control , Employment/psychology , Job Satisfaction , Leadership , Stakeholder Participation/psychology , Adult , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...