Digital health, gender and health equity: invisible imperatives.

A growing body of evidence shows the use of digital technologies in health-referred to as eHealth, mHealth or 'digital health'-is improving and saving lives in low- and middle-income countries. Despite this prevalent and persistent narrative, very few studies examine its effects on health equity, gender and power dynamics. This journal supplement addresses these invisible imperatives by going beyond traditional measures of coverage, efficacy and cost-effectiveness associated with digital health interventions, to unpack different experiences of health workers and beneficiaries. The collection of papers presents findings from a cohort of implementation research projects in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, and two commentaries offer observations from learning-oriented evaluative activities across the entire cohort. The story emerging from this cohort is comprised of three themes: (i) digital health can positively influence health equity; (ii) gender and power analyses are essential; and (iii) digital health can be used to strengthen upward and downward accountability. These findings, at the individual project level and at the level of the cohort, provide encouraging recommendations on how to approach the design, implementation and evaluation of digital health interventions to address the Sustainable Development Goals agenda of leaving no one behind.

The change-makers of West Africa.

West Africa was the focus of global attention during the Ebola virus disease outbreak, when systemic health system weaknesses compounded a serious emergency and complicated response efforts. Following the crisis, calls were made to strengthen health systems, but investments to date have fallen short of delivering the support needed to build strong health systems able to prevent and manage future outbreaks.In part, this reality serves to highlight the shortcomings of the solutions being repeatedly prioritised by external funders and experts, solutions that often fail to consider the wealth of West African evidence and actors actively working to strengthen the leadership and health systems needed to drive and sustainably improve national health outcomes. Unfortunately, this knowledge and experience are rarely heard in the global arena.This journal supplement is a contribution, although small, to changing this practice by putting the perspectives, experiences and knowledge of West Africans on the table. It presents findings from a series of research and capacity development projects in West Africa funded by the International Development Research Centre's Maternal and Child Health programme (formerly Governance for Equity in Health Systems).The evidence presented here centres around two key themes. First, the theme that context matters. The evidence shows how context can change the shape of externally imposed interventions or policies resulting in unintended outcomes. At the same time, it highlights evidence showing how innovative local actors are developing their own approaches, usually low-cost and embedded in the context, to bring about change. Second, the collection of articles discusses the critical need to overcome the existing fragmentation of expertise, knowledge and actors, and to build strong working relationships amongst all actors so they can effectively work together to identify priority issues that can realistically be addressed given the available windows of opportunity.Vibrant West African-led collaborations amongst researchers, decision-makers and civil society, which are effectively supported by national, regional and global funding, need to foster, strengthen and use locally-generated evidence to ensure that efforts to strengthen health systems and improve regional health outcomes are successful. The solutions are clearly not to be found in the 'travelling models' of standardised interventions.

The fallacy of coverage: uncovering disparities to improve immunization rates through evidence. Results from the Canadian International Immunization Initiative Phase 2 - Operational Research Grants.

Immunization can and does save lives. However, the presence of vaccines does not easily translate into every child being vaccinated, and this is what the studies in this journal supplement reveal. From South Asia to West Africa,the evidence presented here reveals what we are calling the fallacy of coverage, going beyond uncovering the real vaccination rates to providing evidence on the reasons for the lack of effective coverage.The evidence for the fallacy of coverage is part of an operational research program entitled the Canadian International Immunization Initiative Phase 2 (CIII2). Through a competitive peer review process, six research grants were awarded to increase access to and enhance immunization services. This journal supplement provides a forum for the presentation of the results of five of the six studies.The story of the fallacy of coverage is made up of five theme areas of evidence - timeliness of immunization, social and gender inequities, vaccine efficacy, understanding demand side issues to tailor interventions, and national data sets masking actual district level coverage rates - that reveal the discrepancies in immunization coverage rates and the reasons behind these discrepancies. As part of the story, and to turn around the fallacy of coverage, the studies also provide proof of effective and locally relevant solutions.Policies and funding, while keeping an eye on future diseases, clearly need to maintain and increase support to address existing vaccine-preventable diseases to increase coverage such that by 2015 we can achieve 90% national vaccination coverage and reach the MDG of reducing mortality rates among children under five by two-thirds.The results from the operational research grants of the CIII2 offer some answers on how to reach this goal by demonstrating how locally generated evidence can inform immunization strategies to ensure that children who need to get vaccinated will get vaccinated, and vaccinated on time.