Firearm injury-a preventable public health issue.

Firearm-related injury is a leading cause of death disproportionately affecting adolescents and young adults across the world, especially in the Americas. Little progress has been made over the past four decades, as inaction and the adoption of ineffective or unevidenced interventions have become commonplace. The COVID-19 pandemic reconfigured health systems towards prevention and harm reduction, sharpened public attention to the burden of preventable deaths, and inspired a fresh ambition of eliminating avertable deaths. In this Viewpoint, we argue that preventing firearm injury should garner bolder action in post-pandemic public health and we present a case for reducing the global burden of firearm injury supported by evidence and international examples. Crucially, we aim to guide policy making in directions that end the cycle of grief, anger, activism, deflection, and inaction and create more peaceful and fairer societies.

Policy-makers' views on translating burden of disease estimates in health policies: bridging the gap through data visualization.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge Translation (KT) and data visualization play a vital role in the dissemination of data and information to improve healthcare systems. A better understanding of KT and its utility requires examining its processes, and how these interact with available data tools and platforms and various users. In this context, the aim of this paper is to understand how relevant users interact with data visualization tools, in particular Global Burden of Disease (GBD) visualizations, while also examining KT processes related to data visualization. METHODS: A qualitative case-study consisting of semi-structured interviews with eight policy officers. Interviewees were selected by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) from three countries: Canada, Kenya and New Zealand. Data were analyzed through framework coding, using qualitative analysis software. RESULTS: Policy officers' responses indicated that data can prompt action by engaging users, and effective delivery and translation of data was enhanced by data visualization tools. GBD was considered valuable for use in policy (e.g., planning and prioritizing health policy; facilitating accountability; and tracking and monitoring progress and trends over time and between countries). Using GBD and data visualization tools, participants quickly and easily accessed key information and turned it into actionable messages; engaging visuals captured decision-makers' attention while providing information in a digestible, time-saving manner. However, participants emphasized an overall disconnect between research and public health. Functionality and technical issues, e.g., absence of tool guides and tool complexity, as well as lacking buy-in and awareness of certain tools from those less familiar with GBD, were named as major barriers. In order to address this "know-do" gap, user-friendly knowledge translation tools were stated as crucial, as was the importance of collaboration and leveraging different insights from data generators and users to inform health policy. CONCLUSIONS: Policy officers aware of KT are willing to utilize data visualization tools as they value them as an engaging and important mechanism to foster the use of GBD data in policy-making. To further facilitate policy officers' efforts to effectively use GBD data in policy and practice, further research is required into how users perceive and interact with data visualization and other KT tools.

Sources and Focus of Health Development Assistance, 1990-2014.

IMPORTANCE: The governments of high-income countries and private organizations provide billions of dollars to developing countries for health. This type of development assistance can have a critical role in ensuring that life-saving health interventions reach populations in need. OBJECTIVES: To identify the amount of development assistance that countries and organizations provided for health and to determine the health areas that received these funds. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Budget, revenue, and expenditure data on the primary agencies and organizations (n = 38) that provided resources to developing countries (n = 146-183, depending on the year) for health from 1990 through 2014 were collected. For each channel (the international agency or organization that directed the resources toward the implementing institution or government), the source and recipient of the development assistance were determined and redundant accounting of the same dollar, which occurs when channels transfer funds among each other, was removed. This research derived the flow of resources from source to intermediary channel to recipient. Development assistance for health (DAH) was divided into 11 mutually exclusive health focus areas, such that every dollar of development assistance was assigned only 1 health focus area. FINDINGS: Since 1990, $458.0 billion of development assistance has been provided to maintain or improve health in developing countries. The largest source of funding was the US government, which provided $143.1 billion between 1990 and 2014, including $12.4 billion in 2014. Of resources that originated with the US government, 70.6% were provided through US government agencies, and 41.0% were allocated for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS. The second largest source of development assistance for health was private philanthropic donors, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other private foundations, which provided $69.9 billion between 1990 and 2014, including $6.2 billion in 2014. These resources were provided primarily through private foundations and nongovernmental organizations and were allocated for a diverse set of health focus areas. Since 1990, 28.0% of all DAH was allocated for maternal health and newborn and child health; 23.2% for HIV/AIDS, 4.3% for malaria, 2.8% for tuberculosis, and 1.5% for noncommunicable diseases. Between 2000 and 2010, DAH increased 11.3% annually. However, since 2010, total DAH has not increased as substantially. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Funding for health in developing countries has increased substantially since 1990, with a focus on HIV/AIDS, maternal health, and newborn and child health. Funding from the US government has played a substantial role in this expansion. Funding for noncommunicable diseases has been limited. Understanding how funding patterns have changed across time and the priorities of sources of international funding across distinct channels, recipients, and health focus areas may help identify where funding gaps persist and where cost-effective interventions could save lives.

Vaccine resource tracking systems.

BACKGROUND: From 1999 to 2010, annual disbursements of development assistance for health for vaccinations increased from $0.5 billion to $2.0 billion (all financial values USD 2010). In its 2012 Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), the World Health Assembly recommended establishing a comprehensive vaccination resource tracking system to better understand the source and recipients of these funds, and ultimately their impact on outcomes. This systematic review aims to respond to the GVAP recommendation in reviewing and assessing the state of the data and literature on vaccination resource tracking. METHODS: We scrutinized all relevant vaccination resource tracking systems identified in the literature and by practitioners in the field. We examined schemes used elsewhere in the health sector and by other sectors. Informant interviews were also conducted to determine what data exists and how it might be utilized. With this information, we completed a qualitative assessment of existing approaches to vaccination resources tracking. RESULTS: Tracking systems provide information about some vaccine-related activity in the majority of low- and middle-income countries. Data are generally available for the period of 2006-2010. Levels of granularity vary. Interviewees were concerned about the degree of rigor used to validate the data and the lack of verification. Data are often presented in tabular form, which may be unwieldy for non-technical audiences. CONCLUSIONS: The schemes currently in place to track the resources available for vaccinations were fairly advanced relative to other mechanisms in the health sector. Nonetheless, the coverage, validity, and accessibility of vaccination resource tracking data could be ameliorated. Establishing improved feedback loops and verification mechanisms that connect country-level administrators and the international organizations that support reporting efforts would enhance data quality.

Global health development assistance remained steady in 2013 but did not align with recipients' disease burden.

Tracking development assistance for health for low- and middle-income countries gives policy makers information about spending patterns and potential improvements in resource allocation. We tracked the flows of development assistance and explored the relationship between national income, disease burden, and assistance. We estimated that development assistance for health reached US$31.3 billion in 2013. Increased assistance from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria; the GAVI Alliance; and bilateral agencies in the United Kingdom helped raise funding to the highest level to date. The largest portion of health assistance targeted HIV/AIDS (25 percent); 20 percent targeted maternal, newborn, and child health. Disease burden and economic development were significantly associated with development assistance for health, but many countries received considerably more or less aid than these indicators predicted. Five countries received more than five times their expected amount of health aid, and seven others received less than one-fifth their expected funding. The lack of alignment between disease burden, income, and funding reveals the potential for improvement in resource allocation.

Regional variation in the allocation of development assistance for health.

BACKGROUND: The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 Study has published disability-adjusted life year (DALY) data at both regional and country levels from 1990 to 2010. Concurrently, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) has published estimates of development assistance for health (DAH) at the country-disease level for this same period of time. FINDINGS: We use disease burden data from the GBD 2010 study and financing data from IHME to calculate ratios of DAH to DALYs across regions and diseases. We examine the magnitude of these ratios and how they have varied over time. We hypothesize that the variation in this ratio across regions would be relatively small. However, from 2006 to 2010, we find there was considerable variation in the levels of DAH per DALY across regions. For total funding, the relative standard deviation (standard deviation as a percentage of the mean) across regions was 50%. For DAH specific to HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, the relative standard deviations were 50%, 200% and 60%, respectively. While these deviations are high, with the exception of malaria, they have decreased since the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: There are no evident explanations for so much variation in funding across regions, especially holding the purpose of the funding constant. This suggests donors' allocation processes have not been particularly sensitive to disease burdens. To maximize health gains, donors should explicitly incorporate new disease burden data along with the relative costs and efficacy of interventions into their allocation process.

The state of health in the Arab world, 1990-2010: an analysis of the burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors.

BACKGROUND: The Arab world has a set of historical, geopolitical, social, cultural, and economic characteristics and has been involved in several wars that have affected the burden of disease. Moreover, financial and human resources vary widely across the region. We aimed to examine the burden of diseases and injuries in the Arab world for 1990, 2005, and 2010 using data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010 (GBD 2010). METHODS: We divided the 22 countries of the Arab League into three categories according to their gross national income: low-income countries (LICs; Comoros, Djibouti, Mauritania, Yemen, and Somalia), middle-income countries (MICs; Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, occupied Palestinian territory, Sudan, Syria, and Tunisia), and high-income countries (HICs; Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates). For the whole Arab world, each income group, and each individual country, we estimated causes of death, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), DALY-attributable risk factors, years of life lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost due to premature mortality (YLLs), and life expectancy by age and sex for 1990, 2005, and 2010. FINDINGS: Ischaemic heart disease was the top cause of death in the Arab world in 2010 (contributing to 14·3% of deaths), replacing lower respiratory infections, which were the leading cause of death in 1990 (11·0%). Lower respiratory infections contributed to the highest proportion of DALYs overall (6·0%), and in female indivduals (6·1%), but ischaemic heart disease was the leading cause of DALYs in male individuals (6·0%). DALYs from non-communicable diseases--especially ischaemic heart disease, mental disorders such as depression and anxiety, musculoskeletal disorders including low back pain and neck pain, diabetes, and cirrhosis--increased since 1990. Major depressive disorder was ranked first as a cause of YLDs in 1990, 2005, and 2010, and lower respiratory infections remained the leading cause of YLLs in 2010 (9·2%). The burden from HIV/AIDS also increased substantially, specifically in LICs and MICs, and road injuries continued to rank highly as a cause of death and DALYs, especially in HICs. Deaths due to suboptimal breastfeeding declined from sixth place in 1990 to tenth place in 2010, and childhood underweight declined from fifth to 11th place. INTERPRETATION: Since 1990, premature death and disability caused by communicable, newborn, nutritional, and maternal disorders (with the exception of HIV/AIDS) has decreased in the Arab world--although these disorders do still persist in LICs--whereas the burden of non-communicable diseases and injuries has increased. The changes in the burden of disease will challenge already stretched human and financial resources because many Arab countries are now dealing with both non-communicable and infectious diseases. A road map for health in the Arab world is urgently needed. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The global financial crisis has led to a slowdown in growth of funding to improve health in many developing countries.

How has funding to developing countries for health improvement changed in the wake of the global financial crisis? The question is vital for policy making, planning, and advocacy purposes in donor and recipient countries alike. We measured the total amount of financial and in-kind assistance that flowed from both public and private channels to improve health in developing countries during the period 1990-2011. The data for the years 1990-2009 reflect disbursements, while the numbers for 2010 and 2011 are preliminary estimates. Development assistance for health continued to grow in 2011, but the rate of growth was low. We estimate that assistance for health grew by 4 percent each year from 2009 to 2011, reaching a total of $27.73 billion. This growth was largely driven by the World Bank's International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and appeared to be a deliberate strategy in response to the global economic crisis. Assistance for health from bilateral agencies grew by only 4 percent, or $444.08 million, largely because the United States slowed its development assistance for health. Health funding through UN agencies stagnated, and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria announced that it would make no new grants for the next two years because of declines in funding. Given the international community's focus on meeting the Millennium Development Goals by 2015 and persistent economic hardship in donor countries, continued measurement of development assistance for health is essential for policy making.

How to do (or not to do) ... Tracking data on development assistance for health.

Development assistance for health (DAH) has increased substantially in recent years and is seen as important to the improvement of health and health systems in developing countries. As a result, there has been increasing interest in tracking and understanding these resource flows from the global health community. A number of datasets, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, are available to track DAH. In this article we review the available datasets on DAH and summarize the strengths and weaknesses of each of these datasets to help researchers make the best choice of which to use to inform their analysis. Finally, we also provide recommendations about how each of these datasets could be improved.

Public financing of health in developing countries: a cross-national systematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Government spending on health from domestic sources is an important indicator of a government's commitment to the health of its people, and is essential for the sustainability of health programmes. We aimed to systematically analyse all data sources available for government spending on health in developing countries; describe trends in public financing of health; and test the extent to which they were related to changes in gross domestic product (GDP), government size, HIV prevalence, debt relief, and development assistance for health (DAH) to governmental and non-governmental sectors. METHODS: We did a systematic analysis of all data sources available for government expenditures on health as agent (GHE-A) in developing countries, including government reports and databases from WHO and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). GHE-A consists of domestically and externally financed public health expenditures. We assessed the quality of these sources and used multiple imputation to generate a complete sequence of GHE-A. With these data and those for DAH to governments, we estimated government spending on health from domestic sources. We used panel-regression methods to estimate the association between government domestic spending on health and GDP, government size, HIV prevalence, debt relief, and DAH disbursed to governmental and non-governmental sectors. We tested the robustness of our conclusions using various models and subsets of countries. FINDINGS: In all developing countries, public financing of health in constant US$ from domestic sources increased by nearly 100% (IMF 120%; WHO 88%) from 1995 to 2006. Overall, this increase was the product of rising GDP, slight decreases in the share of GDP spent by government, and increases in the share of government spending on health. At the country level, while shares of government expenditures to health increased in many regions, they decreased in many sub-Saharan African countries. The statistical analysis showed that DAH to government had a negative and significant effect on domestic government spending on health such that for every US$1 of DAH to government, government health expenditures from domestic resources were reduced by $0.43 (p=0) to $1.14 (p=0). However, DAH to the non-governmental sector had a positive and significant effect on domestic government health spending. Both results were robust to multiple specifications and subset analyses. Other factors, such as debt relief, had no detectable effect on domestic government health spending. INTERPRETATION: To address the negative effect of DAH on domestic government health spending, we recommend strong standardised monitoring of government health expenditures and government spending in other health-related sectors; establishment of collaborative targets to maintain or increase the share of government expenditures going to health; investment in the capacity of developing countries to effectively receive and use DAH; careful assessment of the risks and benefits of expanded DAH to non-governmental sectors; and investigation of the use of global price subsidies or product transfers as mechanisms for DAH. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Financing of global health: tracking development assistance for health from 1990 to 2007.

BACKGROUND: The need for timely and reliable information about global health resource flows to low-income and middle-income countries is widely recognised. We aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2007. METHODS: We defined DAH as all flows for health from public and private institutions whose primary purpose is to provide development assistance to low-income and middle-income countries. We used several data sources to measure the yearly volume of DAH in 2007 US$, and created an integrated project database to examine the composition of this assistance by recipient country. FINDINGS: DAH grew from $5.6 billion in 1990 to $21.8 billion in 2007. The proportion of DAH channelled via UN agencies and development banks decreased from 1990 to 2007, whereas the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), and non-governmental organisations became the conduit for an increasing share of DAH. DAH has risen sharply since 2002 because of increases in public funding, especially from the USA, and on the private side, from increased philanthropic donations and in-kind contributions from corporate donors. Of the $13.8 [corrected] billion DAH in 2007 for which project-level information was available, $4.9 [corrected] billion was for HIV/AIDS, compared with $0.6 [corrected] billion for tuberculosis, $0.7 [corrected] billion for malaria, and $0.9 billion for health-sector support. Total DAH received by low-income and middle-income countries was positively correlated with burden of disease, whereas per head DAH was negatively correlated with per head gross domestic product. INTERPRETATION: This study documents the substantial rise of resources for global health in recent years. Although the rise in DAH has resulted in increased funds for HIV/AIDS, other areas of global health have also expanded. The influx of funds has been accompanied by major changes in the institutional landscape of global health, with global health initiatives such as the Global Fund and GAVI having a central role in mobilising and channelling global health funds. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.