In this study, researchers examined current rates for healthy life expectancy (HALE) and changes over the past two decades in 187 countries, using data from the Global Burden Disease Study 2010. They calculated HALE estimates for each population defined by sex, country and year, and estimated the contributions of changes in child mortality, adult mortality, and disability to overall change in population health between 1990 and 2010. Findings showed that, in 2010, global male HALE at birth was 58.3 years and global female HALE at birth was 61.8 years. HALE increased more slowly than did life expectancy over the past 20 years, with each one-year increase in life expectancy at birth associated with a 0.8-year increase in HALE. Between countries and over time, life expectancy was strongly and positively related to number of years lost to disability. HALE also differs substantially between countries. As life expectancy has increased, the number of healthy years lost to disability has also increased in most countries, consistent with the expansion of morbidity hypothesis, which has implications for health planning and health-care expenditure, the authors argue. Compared with substantial progress in reduction of mortality over the past two decades, relatively little progress has been made in reduction of the overall effect of non-fatal disease and injury on population health. The authors propose that HALE may be a useful indicator for monitoring health post-2015.
Monitoring equity and research policy
Inadequate reporting is problematic for several reasons. If authors do not provide sufficient details concerning the conduct of their study, readers are left with an incomplete picture of what was done. As such, they are not able to judge the merits of the results and interpret them. The EQUATOR Network is a new initiative aimed at improving the clarity and transparency of reporting health research.
"As scientists and clinicians, we share a deep commitment to our patients and the public health of our nation. We have conducted and/or supported research aimed at decreasing vertical transmission. We remain fully committed to the implementation, within the broader government programme for AIDS prevention and care, of a national programme against vertical transmission, and to do further research in support of this goal. There is strong evidence in support of the use of antiretrovirals to reduce vertical transmission. The challenge remains in translating these research findings into policy and practice in South Africa."
The advent of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as a HIV-prevention strategy has received optimistic support among HIV researchers. However, discourse on PrEP trials has tended to be dominated by the disputes arising between some activist groups and researchers about the research methodologies. Instead, this paper discusses other issues oftentimes neglected in discussions relating to PrEP trials. Specifically, it focuses on the possible ethical implications and the potential impact of sub-Saharan Africa's socio-economic conditions on the promised benefits of PrEP trials for the region and the continent. We argue that the concept of PrEP as a affordable and practical HIV-prevention intervention presents challenges and questions that urgently need addressing as researchers await results from several ongoing trials. If research is undertaken with no plans on how the results of specific trials can render actual HIV-prevention-benefits — especially for the world's poor — then such endeavours risk being merely information-acquiring ventures.
Researchers should protect the welfare of research participants by providing methods to reduce their risk of acquiring HIV. This is especially important given that late-phase HIV vaccine trials enrol HIV-uninfected trial volunteers from high-risk populations. This study recommends that current normative guidance be systematically reviewed and actual practice at vaccine sites be documented. Adding new tools to the current package of prevention services will involve complex decision making with few set standards, and regulatory and scientific challenges. The paper recommends that stakeholders (including regulators) should convene to consider standards of evidence for new tools, and that decision-making processes be explicitly documented and researched. A further critical ethical task is exploring the threshold at which adding new tools will compromise the validity of trial results.
Health systems research is increasingly being conducted in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Such research should aim to reduce health disparities between and within countries as a matter of global justice. For such research to do so, ethical guidance that is consistent with egalitarian theories of social justice proposes it ought to (amongst other things) focus on worst-off countries and research populations. Yet who constitutes the worst-off is not well-defined. By applying existing work on disadvantage from political philosophy, the paper demonstrates that (at least) two options exist for how to define the worst-off upon whom equity-oriented health systems research should focus: those who are worst-off in terms of health or those who are systematically disadvantaged. The paper describes in detail how both concepts can be understood and what metrics can be relied upon to identify worst-off countries and research populations at the sub-national level (groups, communities), considering real-world cases of health systems research in Uganda and India in 2011. It is recommended that health researchers (or other actors) should use the concept that best reflects their moral commitments—namely, to perform research focused on reducing health inequalities or systematic disadvantage more broadly. If addressing the latter, it is recommended that they rely on the multidimensional poverty approach rather than the income approach to identify worst-off populations.
This article explores how health research can be improved to ensure that its results are translated into action. It is based on the author's experience of health research on HIV/AIDS in South Africa. The article pays particular attention to dissemination, and it argues that the most common approach to information dissemination adopted by research organisations, passive dissemination of information in the form of research reports and policy recommendations, is largely ineffective.
In light of increased access to policy dialogue about the reform of the international aid architecture, this paper explores ways in which southern researchers can maximise their input in to the debate. The authors argue that the current aid system is changing significantly, not only in terms of the increasing amounts of money which are likely to flow through the system, but also because of the range of new donors and funding vehicles which are joining it. This change is making the system more complex, and could potentially reduce the effectiveness of the aid that flows through it, but it also offers significant opportunities for reform. Specifically a number of decision-making fora have recently opened up which offer the chance for greater participation by southern organisations, particularly research institutes and think-tanks. To aid southern researchers’ affect on the debate the authors propose that they: target the content of the research; ensure it is in an appropriate medium and tailor it to the policy-makers; identify which international aid policy fora are most likely to take up their research; and increase focus on effective communication – researchers need to prepare a communications strategy to help to target their limited resources and capacity more effectively.
A recent World Bank press release on a World Bank and WHO report announced that "400 million people do not have access to essential health services.” The author argues in this article that this would be a highly over-optimistic misread of what WHO and the World Bank found. By more reasonable understandings of how many people lack access to essential health services, untold hundreds of millions more than 400 million people lack access to essential health services. He notes that the road ahead to universal health coverage is considerably longer than the headline figure implies. The report itself – beneath the headlines – covers many concerns and raises issues of quality and other concerns in a more complex reality. The author of this article notes that official monitoring should capture this complexity as what is monitored may well affect what governments prioritize, and the health services people actually receive, and so that a singular focus on access does not hide other aspects of people’s right to health – including the quality of health services and their acceptability.
This article explores the use of multimedia to enhance development enquiry and analysis, and the design and implementation of process interventions aimed at poverty alleviation in sub-Saharan Africa. It discusses some important interventions in Africa: the Catalyzing Access to ICT in Africa (CATIA) programme; the LINK Centre (University of the Witwatersrand); the Acacia Initiative; the African Information Society Initiative (AISI); the APC (Association for Progressive Communications); and Research ICT Africa. Despite these interventions, Africa still faces problems of access and use of these interventions and services, especially among poor and vulnerable people. The areas of weakness include: poor performance in the telecommunications sector; little e-access and use in small and medium enterprises; and absence of an equitable system of intellectual property rights that is friendly to developing countries in sub-Saharan Africa. As a result the author observes barriers to access often expensive, modern technologies.