18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Health systems research in fragile and conflict-affected states: a research agenda-setting exercise

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          There is increasing interest amongst donors in investing in the health sectors of fragile and conflict-affected states, although there is limited research evidence and research funding to support this. Agreeing priority areas is therefore critical. This paper describes an 18-month process to develop a consultative research agenda and questions for health systems research, providing reflections on the process as well as its output.

          Methods

          After a scoping review had been conducted, primary data was collected from August 2014 to September 2015. Data was collected using a mixture of methods, including an online survey (n = 61), two face-to-face group sessions (one with 11 participants; one with 17), email consultation (n = 18), a webinar (n = 65), and feedback via LinkedIn. Two steering committees of purposively selected experts guided the research process – a core steering committee (n = 10) and broad steering committee (n = 20). The process moved from developing broad topics and lists of research needs to grouping and honing them down into a smaller, prioritised agenda, with specific research questions associated to each topic.

          Results

          An initial list of 146 topics was honed down to 25 research needs through this process, grouped thematically under transition and sustainability, resilience and fragility, gender and equity, accessibility, capacity building, actors and accountability, community, healthcare delivery, health workforce, and health financing. They were not ranked, as all health system areas are interdependent. The research agenda forms a starting point for local contextualisation and is not definitive.

          Conclusions

          A wide range of stakeholders participated in the different stages of this exercise, which produced a useful starting point for health systems research agenda setting in fragile and conflict-affected states. The process of engagement may have been as valuable for building a community of researchers as the product. It is now important to drive forward the research agenda. Without both a higher profile and deeper focus for this area, there is a real risk that fragile and conflict-affected states will continue to fall behind in global health and development goals.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0124-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice

          Health research priority setting processes assist researchers and policymakers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential public health benefit. Many different approaches to health research prioritization exist, but there is no agreement on what might constitute best practice. Moreover, because of the many different contexts for which priorities can be set, attempting to produce one best practice is in fact not appropriate, as the optimal approach varies per exercise. Therefore, following a literature review and an analysis of health research priority setting exercises that were organized or coordinated by the World Health Organization since 2005, we propose a checklist for health research priority setting that allows for informed choices on different approaches and outlines nine common themes of good practice. It is intended to provide generic assistance for planning health research prioritization processes. The checklist explains what needs to be clarified in order to establish the context for which priorities are set; it reviews available approaches to health research priority setting; it offers discussions on stakeholder participation and information gathering; it sets out options for use of criteria and different methods for deciding upon priorities; and it emphasizes the importance of well-planned implementation, evaluation and transparency.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            What is a resilient health system? Lessons from Ebola.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Rebuilding health systems to improve health and promote statebuilding in post-conflict countries: a theoretical framework and research agenda.

              Violent conflicts claim lives, disrupt livelihoods, and halt delivery of essential services, such as health care and education. Health systems are often devastated in conflicts as health professionals flee, infrastructure is destroyed, and the supply of drugs and supplies is halted. We propose that early reconstruction of a functioning, equitable health system in countries recovering from conflict is an investment with a range of benefits for post-conflict countries. Building on the growing literature about health systems as social and political institutions, we elaborate a logic model that outlines how health systems may contribute not only to improved health status but also potentially to broader statebuilding and enhanced prospects for peace. Specifically, we propose that careful design of the core elements of the health system by national governments and their development partners can promote reliable provision of essential health services while demonstrating a commitment to equity, strengthening government accountability to citizens, and building the capacity of government to manage core social programs. We review the conceptual basis and extant empirical evidence for these mechanisms, identify knowledge gaps, and suggest a research agenda.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                aniek.woodward@lshtm.ac.uk
                e.sondorp@kit.nl
                switter@qmu.ac.uk
                tim.martineau@lstmed.ac.uk
                Journal
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Research Policy and Systems
                BioMed Central (London )
                1478-4505
                21 July 2016
                21 July 2016
                2016
                : 14
                : 51
                Affiliations
                [ ]London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
                [ ]Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [ ]Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
                [ ]Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
                Article
                124
                10.1186/s12961-016-0124-1
                4955129
                27439611
                e153dcbf-4253-42ea-aac0-209b0ce21017
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 2 February 2016
                : 16 June 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004440, Wellcome Trust;
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Health & Social care
                health systems research,research agenda,priority setting,fragile states,conflict affected states

                Comments

                Comment on this article