12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Setting a research agenda to advance maternal, newborn, and child health in Ethiopia: An adapted CHNRI prioritization 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

          Critical to the improvement of maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) in Ethiopia – where 14 000 mothers die from pregnancy-, childbirth-, or postpartum-related complications each year – is high-quality research and its effective translation into policy and practice. While Ethiopia has rapidly expanded the number of institutions that train and conduct MNCH research, the absence of a shared research agenda inhibits a coordinated approach to inform critical MNCH policy needs. The HaSET Maternal and Child Health Research Program (MCHRP) conducted a mixed methods formative assessment and prioritization exercise to guide investments in future MNCH research in Ethiopia.

          Methods

          We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, soliciting 56 priority research questions via key informant interviews. Through an online survey, experts scored these on their ability to generate new, actionable evidence that could inform more effective and equitable MNCH programs in Ethiopia. At a workshop in Addis Ababa, experts scored the questions by answerability and ethics, usefulness, disease burden reduction, and impact on equity. Research priority scores were calculated for both the online survey and workshop scoring and averaged to attain a ranked priority list. We validated and contextualized the results by conducting consensus-building discussions with MNCH experts and two community workshops. In total, approximately 100 participants were involved.

          Results

          Average research priority scores ranged from 58.4 to 83.7 out of 100.0. The top identified research priorities speak to critical needs in the Ethiopian context: to improve population coverage of proven interventions like integrated community case management (ICCM), family integrated newborn care, and kangaroo mother care (KMC); to better understand the determinants of outcomes like home deliveries, immunization drop-out, and antenatal and postpartum care-seeking; and to strengthen health system and workforce capabilities.

          Conclusions

          This exercise expanded on the CHNRI methodology by comparing prioritization across different audiences, formats, and criteria. Agreement between both scoring rounds and consensus-building discussions was strong, demonstrating the reliability of the CHNRI method. By sharing this research priority list broadly among researchers, practitioners, and donors, we aim to improve coordinated MNCH evidence generation and translation into policy in Ethiopia.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

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

          Setting priorities in global child health research investments: guidelines for implementation of CHNRI method.

          This article provides detailed guidelines for the implementation of systematic method for setting priorities in health research investments that was recently developed by Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI). The target audience for the proposed method are international agencies, large research funding donors, and national governments and policy-makers. The process has the following steps: (i) selecting the managers of the process; (ii) specifying the context and risk management preferences; (iii) discussing criteria for setting health research priorities; (iv) choosing a limited set of the most useful and important criteria; (v) developing means to assess the likelihood that proposed health research options will satisfy the selected criteria; (vi) systematic listing of a large number of proposed health research options; (vii) pre-scoring check of all competing health research options; (viii) scoring of health research options using the chosen set of criteria; (ix) calculating intermediate scores for each health research option; (x) obtaining further input from the stakeholders; (xi) adjusting intermediate scores taking into account the values of stakeholders; (xii) calculating overall priority scores and assigning ranks; (xiii) performing an analysis of agreement between the scorers; (xiv) linking computed research priority scores with investment decisions; (xv) feedback and revision. The CHNRI method is a flexible process that enables prioritizing health research investments at any level: institutional, regional, national, international, or global.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method

            Background Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the “Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative”) as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. Methods We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so–called grey literature. Results Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low– and middle–income countries, and national–level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI–based articles adhered to the five recommended priority–setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two–thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, “low cost”, “sustainability”, “acceptability”, “feasibility”, “relevance” and others). Conclusions The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority–setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on “crowd–sourcing”. It is inclusive, fostering “ownership” of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low– and middle–income countries.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Reported Barriers to Healthcare Access and Service Disruptions Caused by COVID-19 in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and Nigeria: A Telephone Survey

              ABSTRACT. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have short-term and long-term impacts on health services across sub-Saharan African countries. A telephone survey in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and Nigeria was conducted to assess the effects of the pandemic on healthcare services from the perspectives of healthcare providers (HCPs) and community members. A total of 900 HCPs (300 from each country) and 1,797 adult community members (approximately 600 from each country) participated in the study. Adjusted risk ratios (ARRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using modified Poisson regression. According to the HCPs, more than half (56%) of essential health services were affected. Child health services and HIV/surgical/other services had a slightly higher percentage of interruption (33%) compared with maternal health services (31%). A total of 21.8%, 19.3%, and 7.7% of the community members reported that their family members and themselves had difficulty accessing childcare services, maternal health, and other health services, respectively. Nurses had a lower risk of reporting high service interruptions than physicians (ARR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.56–0.95). HCPs at private facilities (ARR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59–0.84) had a lower risk of reporting high service interruptions than those at governmental facilities. Health services in Nigeria were more likely to be interrupted than those in Burkina Faso (ARR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.19–1.59). Health authorities should work with multiple stakeholders to ensure routine health services and identify novel and adaptive approaches to recover referral services, medical care, maternal and child health, family planning, immunization and health promotion, and prevention during the COVID-19 era.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Glob Health
                J Glob Health
                JGH
                Journal of Global Health
                International Society of Global Health
                2047-2978
                2047-2986
                10 February 2023
                2023
                : 13
                : 04010
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [2 ]Ethiopia Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
                [3 ]HaSET MNCH research program, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
                [4 ]Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, St. Paul’s Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
                [5 ]Ethiopian Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
                [6 ]Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [7 ]Division of Medical Critical Care, Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                Author notes
                [*]

                Joint first authorship.

                Correspondence to:
Grace J. Chan
Departments of Pediatrics and Epidemiology, Harvard Medical School and T.H. Chan School of Public Health 
677 Huntington Ave, Boston, Massachusetts
USA
 grace.chan@ 123456hsph.harvard.edu
                Article
                jogh-13-04010
                10.7189/13.04010
                9910124
                37478357
                52fac111-ad05-4478-85f2-5c68702fc9d2
                Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 15, Pages: 14
                Categories
                Articles

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content51

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors148