Zicker Fabio, Faid Miriam, Reeder John, Aslanyan Garry
Center for Technological Development in Health (CDTS), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Av Brasil 4036, 8th floor, room 814, 21040-361, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Special Programme for Research Training in Tropical Disease (TDR), World Health Organization, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2015 Dec 9;13:75. doi: 10.1186/s12961-015-0062-3.
The fast growth of global health initiatives (GHIs) has raised concerns regarding achievement of coherence and synergy among distinct, complementary and sometimes competing activities. Herein, we propose an approach to compare GHIs with regard to their main purpose and operational aspects, using the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR/WHO) as a case study. The overall goal is to identify synergies and optimize efforts to provide solutions to reduce the burden of diseases.
Twenty-six long-established GHIs were identified from among initiatives previously associated/partnered with TDR/WHO. All GHIs had working streams that would benefit from linking to the capacity building or implementation research focus of TDR. Individual profiles were created using a common template to collect information on relevant parameters. For analytical purposes, GHIs were simultaneously clustered in five and eight groups according to their 'intended outcome' and 'operational framework', respectively. A set of specific questions was defined to assess coherence/alignment against a TDR reference profile by attributing a score, which was subsequently averaged per GHI cluster. GHI alignment scores for intended outcome were plotted against scores for operational framework; based on the analysis of coherence/alignment with TDR functions and operations, a risk level (high, medium or low) of engagement was attributed to each GHI.
The process allowed a bi-dimensional ranking of GHIs with regards to how adequately they fit with or match TDR features and perspectives. Overall, more consistence was observed with regard to the GHIs' main goals and expected outcomes than with their operational aspects, reflecting the diversity of GHI business models. Analysis of coherence indicated an increasing common trend for enhancing the engagement of developing country stakeholders, building research capacity and optimization of knowledge management platforms in support of improved access to healthcare.
The process used offers a broader approach that could be adapted by other GHIs to build coherence and synergy with peer organizations and helps highlight the potential contribution of each GHI in the new era of sustainable development goals. Emerging opportunities and new trends suggest that engagement between GHIs should be selective and tailored to ensure efficient collaborations.
全球卫生倡议(GHIs)的快速发展引发了人们对不同、互补且有时相互竞争的活动之间实现协调一致与协同增效的担忧。在此,我们提出一种方法,以热带病研究和培训特别规划(TDR/世卫组织)为案例研究,比较全球卫生倡议在其主要目的和运作方面的情况。总体目标是识别协同增效之处并优化努力,以提供减轻疾病负担的解决方案。
从先前与TDR/世卫组织相关联/合作的倡议中确定了26个长期存在的全球卫生倡议。所有全球卫生倡议都有一些工作流程,通过与TDR的能力建设或实施研究重点相联系将从中受益。使用通用模板创建了各个概况,以收集有关相关参数的信息。为了进行分析,全球卫生倡议分别根据其“预期成果”和“运作框架”同时分为五组和八组。定义了一组特定问题,通过打分来评估与TDR参考概况的一致性/协调性,随后计算每个全球卫生倡议组的平均分。将全球卫生倡议预期成果的协调分数与运作框架的分数绘制成图;基于与TDR职能和运作的一致性/协调性分析,为每个全球卫生倡议确定了参与的风险级别(高、中或低)。
该过程使全球卫生倡议在与TDR特征和观点的契合程度方面进行了二维排名。总体而言,全球卫生倡议的主要目标和预期成果比其运作方面表现出更多的一致性,这反映了全球卫生倡议商业模式的多样性。一致性分析表明,在加强发展中国家利益相关者的参与、建设研究能力以及优化知识管理平台以支持改善医疗服务可及性方面,存在日益普遍的共同趋势。
所采用的过程提供了一种更广泛的方法,其他全球卫生倡议可以采用该方法与同行组织建立协调一致与协同增效,并有助于突出每个全球卫生倡议在可持续发展目标新时代的潜在贡献。新出现的机会和新趋势表明,全球卫生倡议之间的参与应该具有选择性并进行量身定制,以确保高效合作。