Informing evidence-based policy during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery period: learning from a national evidence centre.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the vital need for research to inform policy decision-making and save lives. The Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre (WCEC) was established in March 2021 and funded for two years, to make evidence about the impact of the pandemic and ongoing research priorities for Wales available and actionable to policy decision-makers, service leads and the public. OBJECTIVES: We describe the approaches we developed and our experiences, challenges and future vision. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION: The centre operated with a core team, including a public partnership group, and six experienced research groups as collaborating partners. Our rapid evidence delivery process had five stages: 1. Stakeholder engagement (continued throughout all stages); 2. Research question prioritisation; 3. Bespoke rapid evidence review methodology in a phased approach; 4. Rapid primary research; and 5. Knowledge Mobilisation to ensure the evidence was available for decision-makers. MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS: Between March 2021-23 we engaged with 44 stakeholder groups, completed 35 Rapid Evidence Reviews, six Rapid Evidence Maps and 10 Rapid Evidence Summaries. We completed four primary research studies, with three published in peer reviewed journals, and seven ongoing. Our evidence informed policy decision-making and was cited in 19 Welsh Government papers. These included pandemic infection control measures, the Action Plan to tackle gender inequalities, and Education Renew and Reform policy. We conducted 24 Welsh Government evidence briefings and three public facing symposia. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Strong engagement with stakeholder groups, a phased rapid evidence review approach, and primary research to address key gaps in current knowledge enabled high-quality efficient, evidence outputs to be delivered to help inform Welsh policy decision-making during the pandemic. We learn from these processes to continue to deliver evidence from March 2023 as the Health and Care Research Wales Evidence Centre, with a broader remit of health and social care, to help inform policy and practice decisions during the recovery phase and beyond.

Gender health equity: The case for including men's health.

United States' federal policy and infrastructure fail to explicitly consider the health of men, particularly the poor health of marginalized men. This inattention to men's health hinders the nation's ability to improve population health, to achieve gender health equity, and to achieve health equity more broadly. Expanding efforts to consider gender in federal policy and infrastructure to include men, naming men as a population whose poor health warrants policy attention, creating offices of men's health in federal agencies, and utilizing an intersectional lens to develop and analyze policies that affect health would likely yield critical improvements in population health and health equity in the United States. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, I illustrate the persistence of sex differences in mortality and leading causes of death, and how these patterns mask gender gaps in health that are driven largely by marginalized men. Given the common practice of presenting data by sex and race separately, it is difficult to recognize when the health of specific groups of men warrants attention. I utilize the case of Black men to illustrate the importance of an intersectional approach, and why men's health is critical to achieving gender and racial equity in health. While a gender mainstreaming approach has enhanced the nation's ability to consider and address the health of women and girls, it has not expanded to be inclusive of boys and men. Consequently, I argue that if our goal is to achieve health equity, it is critical to employ an intersectional approach that simultaneously considers the full range of factors that influence individual and population health and well-being. An intersectional approach would facilitate efforts to simultaneously explore strategies to achieve racial, ethnic, and gender health equity, which are driven by structural determinants beyond sex and gender related factors.

The use of evidence to guide decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: divergent perspectives from a qualitative case study in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The challenges of evidence-informed decision-making in a public health emergency have never been so notable as during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions about the decision-making process, including what forms of evidence were used, and how evidence informed-or did not inform-policy have been debated. METHODS: We examined decision-makers' observations on evidence-use in early COVID-19 policy-making in British Columbia (BC), Canada through a qualitative case study. From July 2021- January 2022, we conducted 18 semi-structured key informant interviews with BC elected officials, provincial and regional-level health officials, and civil society actors involved in the public health response. The questions focused on: (1) the use of evidence in policy-making; (2) the interface between researchers and policy-makers; and (3) key challenges perceived by respondents as barriers to applying evidence to COVID-19 policy decisions. Data were analyzed thematically, using a constant comparative method. Framework analysis was also employed to generate analytic insights across stakeholder perspectives. RESULTS: Overall, while many actors' impressions were that BC's early COVID-19 policy response was evidence-informed, an overarching theme was a lack of clarity and uncertainty as to what evidence was used and how it flowed into decision-making processes. Perspectives diverged on the relationship between 'government' and public health expertise, and whether or not public health actors had an independent voice in articulating evidence to inform pandemic governance. Respondents perceived a lack of coordination and continuity across data sources, and a lack of explicit guidelines on evidence-use in the decision-making process, which resulted in a sense of fragmentation. The tension between the processes involved in research and the need for rapid decision-making was perceived as a barrier to using evidence to inform policy. CONCLUSIONS: Areas to be considered in planning for future emergencies include: information flow between policy-makers and researchers, coordination of data collection and use, and transparency as to how decisions are made-all of which reflect a need to improve communication. Based on our findings, clear mechanisms and processes for channeling varied forms of evidence into decision-making need to be identified, and doing so will strengthen preparedness for future public health crises.

Health Insurance Coverage Predicts Health Care Use among Latine Immigrants in Two Policy Contexts.

This study analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from 2016 through 2019 from a federally qualified health center (FQHC) serving predominantly low-income Latine immigrants in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area to examine how changes in health insurance coverage relate to changes in health care use. Federally qualified health center clients were insured for an average of 59% to 63% of their annual visits, but about one-third had no coverage throughout the year. Findings from descriptive regression and within-client fixed effects models indicate that in years with higher proportions of insured visits, clients averaged more medical visits and interpreter services but fewer mental health and care coordination visits. Latine immigrant clients in D.C., a city with a universal health insurance option, had health insurance coverage for 89% of their visits, and averaged more medical and fewer coordination visits relative to those in a neighboring county in a state without a universal insurance option.

Rural Hospital Closures: A Scoping Review of Studies Published Between 1990 and 2020.

Between 1990 and 2020, 334 rural hospitals closed in the United States, and since 2011 hospital closures have outnumbered new hospital openings. This scoping review evaluates peer-reviewed studies published since 1990 with a focus on rural hospital closures, synthesizing studies across six themes: 1) health care policy environment, 2) precursors to rural hospital closures, 3) economic impacts, 4) effects of rural hospital closures on access to care, 5) health and community impacts, and 6) definitions of rural hospitals and communities. In the 1990s, rural hospitals that closed were smaller, while rural hospitals that closed in the 2010s tended to have more beds. Many studies of the health impacts of rural hospital closures yielded null findings. However, these studies differed in their definitions of "rural hospital closure." Given the accelerated rate of hospital closures, more attention should be paid to hospitals that serve rural communities of color and low-income communities.

Reimagining Rural Health Equity: Understanding Disparities And Orienting Policy, Practice, And Research In Rural America.

A narrative has taken hold that public health has failed the US. We argue instead that the US has chronically failed public health, and nowhere have these failures been more apparent than in rural regions. Decades of underinvestment in rural communities, health care, and public health institutions left rural America uniquely vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rural communities outpaced urban ones in deaths, and many rural institutions and communities sustained significant impacts. At the same time, the pandemic prompted creative actions to meet urgent health and social needs, and it illuminated opportunities to address long-standing rural challenges. This article draws on our cross-disciplinary expertise in public health and medical anthropology, as well as our research on COVID-19 and rural health equity in northern New England. In this Commentary, we articulate five principles to inform research, practice, and policy efforts in rural America. We contend that advancing rural health equity beyond the pandemic requires understanding the forces that generate rural disparities and designing policies and practices that account for rural disadvantage.

Indiana's Public Health Investment Holds Insights For Other States.

Indiana has a business-friendly environment, but historical underinvestment in public health has yielded poor health outcomes. In 2023, when trust in governmental public health was strained nationwide, Indiana increased public health spending by 1,500 percent. In this article, we explain how Indiana achieved this unprecedented legislative victory for public health, describing the context, approach, and lessons learned. Specifically, an Indiana University report linking economic vitality and overall health sparked the creation of a governor's commission charged with exploring ways to address Indiana's shortcomings. Working with the Indiana Department of Health, the commission developed multisectoral coalitions and business and government partnerships, and it maintained consistent and coordinated communication with policy makers. Lessons learned included the value of uncoupling public health from partisan narratives, appointing diverse commission membership with strategically selected cochairs, involving local leaders, and ensuring local decision-making control. We believe that Indiana's approach holds insights for other states interested in strengthening public health funding in the current era.

Spirituality As A Determinant Of Health: Emerging Policies, Practices, And Systems.

Reimagining public health's future should include explicitly considering spirituality as a social determinant of health that is linked to human goods and is deeply valued by people and their communities. Spirituality includes a sense of ultimate meaning, purpose, transcendence, and connectedness. With that end in mind, we assessed how recommendations recently issued by an expert panel for integrating spiritual factors into public health and medicine are being adopted in current practice in the United States. These recommendations emerged from a systematic review of empirical evidence on spirituality, serious illness, and population health published between 2000 and 2022. For each recommendation, we reviewed current federal, state, and local policies and practices recognizing spiritual factors, and we considered the ways in which they reflected the panel's recommendations. In this article, we highlight opportunities for broader application and scale while also noting the potential harms and benefits associated with incorporating these recommendations in various contexts. This analysis, while respecting the spiritual and religious diversity of the US population, identifies promising approaches for strengthening US public health by integrating spiritual considerations to inform person- and community-centered policy and practice.

Implementation factors of non-communicable disease policies and programmes for children and youth in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Despite declared life-course principles in non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention and management, worldwide focus has been on older rather than younger populations. However, the burden from childhood NCDs has mounted; particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is limited knowledge regarding the implementation of paediatric NCD policies and programmes in LMICs, despite their disproportionate burden of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to understand the barriers to and facilitators of paediatric NCD policy and programme implementation in LMICs. METHODS: We systematically searched medical databases, Web of Science and WHOLIS for studies on paediatric NCD policy and programme implementation in LMICs. Screening and quality assessment were performed independently by researchers, using consensus to resolve differences. Data extraction was conducted within the WHO health system building-blocks framework. Narrative thematic synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: 93 studies (1992-2020) were included, spanning 86 LMICs. Most were of moderate or high quality. 78% reported on paediatric NCDs outside the four major NCD categories contributing to the adult burden. Across the framework, more barriers than facilitators were identified. The most prevalently reported factors were related to health service delivery, with system fragmentation impeding the continuity of age-specific NCD care. A significant facilitator was intersectoral collaborations between health and education actors to deliver care in trusted community settings. Non-health factors were also important to paediatric NCD policies and programmes, such as community stakeholders, sociocultural support to caregivers and school disruptions. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple barriers prevent the optimal implementation of paediatric NCD policies and programmes in LMIC health systems. The low sociopolitical visibility of paediatric NCDs limits their prioritisation, resulting in fragmented service delivery and constraining the integration of programmes across key sectors impacting children, including health, education and social services. Implementation research is needed to understand specific contextual solutions to improve access to paediatric NCD services in diverse LMIC settings.

Outcomes of childhood TB in countries with a universal BCG vaccination policy.

TB remains an important cause of childhood morbidity and mortality. Underdiagnosis, underreporting and limited data on the outcomes of childhood TB have led to an underestimation of its impact.This was a systematic review to characterise childhood TB outcomes. Studies reporting relevant epidemiological data on children between 0 and 14 years of age, with a particular focus on treatment outcomes, from countries with universal bacilli Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination and conducted between 2000 and 2020 were selected. Random effects meta-analysis was performed in R software.We identified 1,806 references and included 35 articles. Among children with TB, the overall proportion of unfavourable outcomes was 19.5% (95% CI 14.4-25.8) and pooled case-fatality ratio was 6.1% (95% CI 4.3-8.4). The proportion of deaths observed among children between 0 and 4 years old was 6.6% (95% CI 4.9-8.7) and 4.6% (95% CI 3.1-6.9) in older children. TB and HIV co-infected children presented a case-fatality ratio of 15.1% (95% CI 7.9-27.0).Despite the efforts made in the last decades, treatment outcomes in childhood TB are still worrisome. Efforts to fill existing gaps and design health policies targeting vulnerable populations, such as children, should be intensified to tackle the global TB burden..

Zoonotic spillover and viral mutations from low and middle-income countries: improving prevention strategies and bridging policy gaps.

The increasing frequency of zoonotic spillover events and viral mutations in low and middle-income countries presents a critical global health challenge. Contributing factors encompass cultural practices like bushmeat consumption, wildlife trade for traditional medicine, habitat disruption, and the encroachment of impoverished settlements onto natural habitats. The existing "vaccine gap" in many developing countries exacerbates the situation by allowing unchecked viral replication and the emergence of novel mutant viruses. Despite global health policies addressing the root causes of zoonotic disease emergence, there is a significant absence of concrete prevention-oriented initiatives, posing a potential risk to vulnerable populations. This article is targeted at policymakers, public health professionals, researchers, and global health stakeholders, particularly those engaged in zoonotic disease prevention and control in low and middle-income countries. The article underscores the importance of assessing potential zoonotic diseases at the animal-human interface and comprehending historical factors contributing to spillover events. To bridge policy gaps, comprehensive strategies are proposed that include education, collaborations, specialized task forces, environmental sampling, and the establishment of integrated diagnostic laboratories. These strategies advocate simplicity and unity, breaking down barriers, and placing humanity at the forefront of addressing global health challenges. Such a strategic and mental shift is crucial for constructing a more resilient and equitable world in the face of emerging zoonotic threats.

Expert Consensus on the Structure, Role, and Procedures of the Korea Expert Committee on Immunization Practices.

BACKGROUND: The Korea Expert Committee on Immunization Practices (KECIP) is a key advisory body the government to develop guidelines and provide technical advisory activities on immunization policies in Korea. A recent policy study, inspired by global best practices, aims to enhance KECIP's functionality for providing timely and transparent recommendations in the face of evolving vaccine science and emerging infectious diseases like COVID-19. METHODS: This study reviewed the current status of KECIP and collected expert opinions through surveys and consultations. Among the 40 panel members who were surveyed, 19 responded to a questionnaire specifically designed to assess the potential areas of improvement within KECIP. RESULTS: The majority of respondents favored maintaining the current member count and emphasized the need for a subcommittee. Opinions varied on issues such as the length of KECIP's term, the representation of vaccine manufacturers' perspectives, and the chairperson's role. However, there was a consensus on the importance of expertise, transparency, and fair proceedings within the committee. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the pivotal role of KECIP in shaping national immunization policies, emphasizing the necessity for informed guidance amidst evolving vaccine science and emerging infectious diseases. Furthermore, it stressed the importance of enhancing KECIP's capacity to effectively address evolving public health challenges and maintain successful immunization programs in South Korea.

Developing an Ethics and Policy Framework for Psychedelic Clinical Care: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: As government agencies around the globe contemplate approval of the first psychedelic medicines, many questions remain about their ethical integration into mainstream medical practice. Objective: To identify key ethics and policy issues related to the eventual integration of psychedelic therapies into clinical practice. Evidence Review: From June 9 to 12, 2023, 27 individuals representing the perspectives of clinicians, researchers, Indigenous groups, industry, philanthropy, veterans, retreat facilitators, training programs, and bioethicists convened at the Banbury Center at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Prior to the meeting, attendees submitted key ethics and policy issues for psychedelic medicine. Responses were categorized into 6 broad topics: research ethics issues; managing expectations and informed consent; therapeutic ethics; training, education, and licensure of practitioners; equity and access; and appropriate role of gatekeeping. Attendees with relevant expertise presented on each topic, followed by group discussion. Meeting organizers (A.L.M., I.G.C., D.S.) drafted a summary of the discussion and recommendations, noting points of consensus and disagreement, which were discussed and revised as a group. Findings: This consensus statement reports 20 points of consensus across 5 ethical issues (reparations and reciprocity, equity, and respect; informed consent; professional boundaries and physical touch; personal experience; and gatekeeping), with corresponding relevant actors who will be responsible for implementation. Areas for further research and deliberation are also identified. Conclusions and Relevance: This consensus statement focuses on the future of government-approved medical use of psychedelic medicines in the US and abroad. This is an incredibly exciting and hopeful moment, but it is critical that policymakers take seriously the challenges ahead.

An Asset Framework to Guide Nonhealth Policy for Population Health.

This JAMA Forum discusses 3 types of assets (financial, physical, and social) that unlock access to resources and shape population health.

State-level policies and receipt of CDC-informed opioid thresholds among commercially insured new chronic opioid users.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of state-level policies on receipt of opioid regimens informed by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) morphine milligram equivalent (MME)/day recommendations. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of new chronic opioid users (NCOUs). SETTING: Commercially insured plans across the United States using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus for Academics database with new chronic use between January 2014 and March 2015. PARTICIPANTS: NCOUs with ≥60-day coverage of opioids within a 90-day period with ≥30-day opioid-free period prior to the date of the first qualifying opioid prescription. INTERVENTIONS: State-level policies including Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) robustness and cannabis policies involving the presence of medical dispensaries and state-wide decriminalization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: NCOUs were placed in three-tiered risk-based average MME/day thresholds: low (>0 to <50), medium (≥50 to <90), and high (≥90). Multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate the association of state-level policies with the thresholds while adjusting for relevant patient-specific factors. RESULTS: NCOUs in states with medium or high PDMP robustness had lower odds of receiving medium (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.69) and high (AOR 0.74; 95 percent CI: 0.59-0.92) thresholds. With respect to cannabis policies, NCOUs in states with medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving high (AOR 0.75; 95 percent CI: 0.60-0.93) thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization had higher odds of receiving high (AOR 1.24; 95 percent CI: 1.04-1.49) thresholds. CONCLUSION: States with highly robust PDMPs and medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving higher opioid thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization correlated with higher odds of receiving high opioid thresholds.

Accountability for maternal and newborn health: Why measuring and monitoring broader social, political, and health system determinants matters.

This article offers four key lessons learned from a set of seven studies undertaken as part of the collection entitled, "Improving Maternal Health Measurement to Support Efforts toward Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality". These papers were aimed at validating ten of the Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality initiative indicators that capture information on distal causes of maternal mortality. These ten indicators were selected through an inclusive consultative process, and the research designs adhere to global recommendations on conducting indicator validation studies. The findings of these papers are timely and relevant given growing recognition of the role of macro-level social, political, and economic factors in maternal and newborn survival. The four key lessons include: 1) Strengthen efforts to capture maternal and newborn health policies to enable global progress assessments while reducing multiple requests to countries for similar data; 2) Monitor indicator "bundles" to understand degree of policy implementation, inconsistencies between laws and practices, and responsiveness of policies to individual and community needs; 3) Promote regular monitoring of a holistic set of human resource metrics to understand how to effectively strengthen the maternal and newborn health workforce; and 4) Develop and disseminate clear guidance for countries on how to assess health system as well as broader social and political determinants of maternal and newborn health. These lessons are consistent with the Kirkland principles of focus, relevance, innovation, equity, global leadership, and country ownership. They stress the value of indicator sets to understand complex phenomenon related to maternal and newborn health, including small groupings of complementary indicators for measuring policy implementation and health workforce issues. They also stress the fundamental ethos that maternal and newborn health indicators should only be tracked if they can drive actions at global, regional, national, or sub-national levels that improve lives.

Autonomous and policy-induced behavior change during the COVID-19 pandemic: Towards understanding and modeling the interplay of behavioral adaptation.

Changes in human behaviors, such as reductions of physical contacts and the adoption of preventive measures, impact the transmission of infectious diseases considerably. Behavioral adaptations may be the result of individuals aiming to protect themselves or mere responses to public containment measures, or a combination of both. What drives autonomous and policy-induced adaptation, how they are related and change over time is insufficiently understood. Here, we develop a framework for more precise analysis of behavioral adaptation, focusing on confluence, interactions and time variance of autonomous and policy-induced adaptation. We carry out an empirical analysis of Germany during the fall of 2020 and beyond. Subsequently, we discuss how behavioral adaptation processes can be better represented in behavioral-epidemiological models. We find that our framework is useful to understand the interplay of autonomous and policy-induced adaptation as a "moving target". Our empirical analysis suggests that mobility patterns in Germany changed significantly due to both autonomous and policy-induced adaption, with potentially weaker effects over time due to decreasing risk signals, diminishing risk perceptions and an erosion of trust in the government. We find that while a number of simulation and prediction models have made great efforts to represent behavioral adaptation, the interplay of autonomous and policy-induced adaption needs to be better understood to construct convincing counterfactual scenarios for policy analysis. The insights presented here are of interest to modelers and policy makers aiming to understand and account for behaviors during a pandemic response more accurately.