Indicators to Measure Adolescent Health at the Country, Regional, and Global Levels: Results of a Five-Year Selection Process by the Global Action for the Measurement of Adolescent Health.

PURPOSE: To improve adolescent health measurement, the Global Action for the Measurement of Adolescent health (GAMA) Advisory Group was formed in 2018 and published a draft list of 52 indicators across six adolescent health domains in 2022. We describe the process and results of selecting the adolescent health indicators recommended by GAMA (hereafter, "GAMA-recommended indicators"). METHODS: Each indicator in the draft list was assessed using the following inputs: (1) availability of data and stakeholders' perceptions on their relevance, acceptability, and feasibility across selected countries; (2) alignment with current measurement recommendations and practices; and (3) data in global databases. Topic-specific working groups comprised of GAMA experts and representatives of United Nations partner agencies reviewed results and provided preliminary recommendations, which were appraised by all GAMA members and finalized. RESULTS: There are 47 GAMA-recommended indicators (36 core and 11 additional) for adolescent health measurement across six domains: policies, programs, and laws (4 indicators); systems performance and interventions (4); health determinants (7); health behaviors and risks (20); subjective well-being (2); and health outcomes and conditions (10). DISCUSSION: These indicators are the result of a robust and structured five-year process to identify a priority set of indicators with relevance to adolescent health globally. This inclusive and participatory approach incorporated inputs from a broad range of stakeholders, including adolescents and young people themselves. The GAMA-recommended indicators are now ready to be used to measure adolescent health at the country, regional, and global levels.

Exploring a Preliminary Set of Indicators to Measure Adolescent Health: Results From a 12-Country Feasibility Study.

PURPOSE: To explore data availability, perceived relevance, acceptability and feasibility of implementing 52 draft indicators for adolescent health measurement in different countries globally. METHODS: A mixed-methods, sequential explanatory study was conducted in 12 countries. An online spreadsheet was used to assess data availability and a stakeholder survey to assess perceived relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of implementing each draft indicator proposed by the Global Action for Measurement of Adolescent health (GAMA). The assessments were discussed in virtual meetings with all countries and in deep dives with three countries. Findings were synthesized using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Data availability varied across the 52 draft GAMA indicators and across countries. Nine countries reported measuring over half of the indicators. Most indicators were rated relevant by stakeholders, while some were considered less acceptable and feasible. The ten lowest-ranking indicators were related to mental health, sexual health and substance use; the highest-ranking indicators centered on broader adolescent health issues, like use of health services. Indicators with higher data availability and alignment with national priorities were generally considered most relevant, acceptable and feasible. Barriers to measurement included legal, ethical and sensitivity issues, challenges with multi-sectoral coordination and data systems flexibility. DISCUSSION: Most of the draft GAMA indicators were deemed relevant and feasible, but contextual priorities and perceived acceptability influenced their implementation in countries. To increase their use for a more comprehensive understanding of adolescent health, better multi-sectoral coordination and tailored capacity building to accommodate the diverse data systems in countries will be required.

Towards Harmonized Adolescent Health Measurement: Assessing Alignment Between Current Recommendations and the Global Action for Measurement of Adolescent Health-Recommended Indicators.

PURPOSE: This study identified alignment of indicators across different initiatives and data collection instruments as a foundation for future harmonization of adolescent health measurement. METHODS: Using the Global Action for Measurement of Adolescent health (GAMA) recommended indicators as the basis for comparison, we conducted a desk review of 14 global-level initiatives, such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents' Health, and five multicountry survey programs, such as the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys and the Global school-based Student Health Survey. We identified initiative and survey indicators similar to a GAMA indicator, deconstructed indicators into standard elements to facilitate comparison, and assessed alignment to the corresponding GAMA indicator across each of the elements. RESULTS: A total of 144 initiative indicators and 90 survey indicators were identified. Twenty-four initiative indicators (17%) and 14 survey indicators (16%) matched the corresponding GAMA indicators across all elements. Population of interest was the most commonly discrepant element; whereas GAMA indicators mostly refer to ages 10-19, many survey and initiative indicators encompass only part of this age range, for example, 15-19-year-olds as a subset of adults ages 15-49 years. An additional 53 initiative indicators (39%) and 44 survey indicators (49%) matched on all elements except the population of interest. DISCUSSION: The current adolescent measurement landscape is inconsistent, with differing recommendations on what and how to measure. Findings from this study support efforts to promote indicator alignment and harmonization across adolescent health measurement stakeholders at the global, regional, and country levels.

Effectiveness of a participatory approach to develop school health interventions in four low resource cities: study protocol of the 'empowering adolescents to lead change using health data' cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Comprehensive local data on adolescent health are often lacking, particularly in lower resource settings. Furthermore, there are knowledge gaps around which interventions are effective to support healthy behaviours. This study generates health information for students from cities in four middle-income countries to plan, implement and subsequently evaluate a package of interventions to improve health outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial in schools in Fez, Morocco; Jaipur, India; Saint Catherine Parish, Jamaica; and Sekondi-Takoradi, Ghana. In each city, approximately 30 schools will be randomly selected and assigned to the control or intervention arm. Baseline data collection includes three components. First, a Global School Health Policies and Practices Survey (G-SHPPS) to be completed by principals of all selected schools. Second, a Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS) to be administered to a target sample of n=3153 13-17 years old students of randomly selected classes of these schools, including questions on alcohol, tobacco and drug use, diet, hygiene, mental health, physical activity, protective factors, sexual behaviours, violence and injury. Third, a study validating the GSHS physical activity questions against wrist-worn accelerometry in one randomly selected class in each control school (n approximately 300 students per city). Intervention schools will develop a suite of interventions using a participatory approach driven by students and involving parents/guardians, teachers and community stakeholders. Interventions will aim to change existing structures and policies at schools to positively influence students' behaviour, using the collected data and guided by the framework for Making Every School a Health Promoting School. Outcomes will be assessed for differential change after a 2-year follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by WHO's Research Ethics Review Committee; by the Jodhpur School of Public Health's Institutional Review Board for Jaipur, India; by the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research Institutional Review Board for Sekondi-Takoradi, Ghana; by the Ministry of Health and Wellness' Advisory Panel on Ethics and Medico-Legal Affairs for St Catherine Parish, Jamaica, and by the Comité d'éthique pour la recherche biomédicale of the Université Mohammed V of Rabat for Fez, Morocco. Findings will be shared through open access publications and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04963426.