Dataset Information

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012-2022) - a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: This systematic review aimed to explore the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and operational research (OR) practices during public health emergencies (PHE) in the southeast Asian region (SEAR) over the last decade. We searched electronic databases and grey literature sources for studies published between 2012 and 2022. The studies written in English were included, and a narrative synthesis was undertaken. A total of 29 studies were included in this review. Among these 25 studies documented M&E and four studies documented OR practices. The majority of the studies were from India and Bangladesh, with no evidence found from Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Myanmar, and Timor-Leste. M&E of surveillance programs were identified among which PHE due to COVID-19 was most prevalent. M&E was conducted in response to COVID-19, cholera, Nipah, Ebola, Candida auris, and hepatitis A. OR practice was minimal and reported from India and Indonesia. India conducted OR on COVID-19 and malaria, whereas Indonesia focused on COVID-19 and influenza. While most SEAR countries have mechanisms for conducting M&E, there is a noticeable limitation in OR practices. There is a compelling need to develop a standard framework for M&E. Additionally, enhancing private sector engagement is crucial for strengthening preparedness against PHE. Furthermore, there is a necessity to increase awareness about the importance of conducting M&E and OR during PHE.

SUBMITTER: Shahrin L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10866922 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012-2022) - a systematic review.

Shahrin Lubaba L Nowrin Iffat I Afrin Sadia S Rahaman Md Zamiur MZ Al Hasan Md Maksud MM Saif-Ur-Rahman K M KM

The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia 20231206

This systematic review aimed to explore the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and operational research (OR) practices during public health emergencies (PHE) in the southeast Asian region (SEAR) over the last decade. We searched electronic databases and grey literature sources for studies published between 2012 and 2022. The studies written in English were included, and a narrative synthesis was undertaken. A total of 29 studies were included in this review. Among these 25 studies documented M&E an ...[more]

PMID: 38361592

Similar Datasets

Project description:Antibiotic use (ABU) plays an important role in the proliferation of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Global antimicrobial consumption in food production is projected to rise by 67% from 2010 to 2030, but available estimates are limited by the scarcity of ABU data and absence of global surveillance systems. The WHO South-East Asia (WHO SEA) region is at high risk of emergence of AMR, likely driven by intensifying farm operations and worsening ABU hotspots. However, little is known about farm-level ABU practices in the region. To summarize emerging evidence and research gaps, we conducted a scoping review of ABU practices following the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. We included studies published between 2010 and 2021 on farm-level ABU/AMR in the 11 WHO SEA member states, and databases were last searched on 31 October 2021. Our search strategy identified 184 unique articles, and 25 publications underwent full-text eligibility assessment. Seventeen studies, reported in 18 publications, were included in the scoping review. We found heterogeneity in the categorizations, definitions, and ABU characterization methods used across studies and farm types. Most studies involved poultry, pig, and cattle farms, and only one study examined aquaculture. Most studies evaluated ABU prevalence by asking respondents about the presence or absence of ABU in the farm. Only two studies quantified antibiotic consumption, and sampling bias and lack of standardized data collection methods were identified as key limitations. Emerging evidence that farm workers had difficulty differentiating antibiotics from other substances contributed to the uncertainty about the reliability of self-reported data without other validation techniques. ABU for growth promotion and treatment were prevalent. We found a large overlap in the critically important antibiotics used in farm animals and humans. The ease of access to antibiotics compounded by the difficulties in accessing quality veterinary care and preventive services likely drive inappropriate ABU in complex ways.

Project description:Introduction: Public engagement is increasingly promoted in the scientific community. Although there are studies about researchers' perspectives on public engagement, these are predominantly from Global North settings and there is little data from the context of Southeast Asia. The Oxford University Clinical Research Unit (OUCRU) is a clinical and public health research programme with sites in Vietnam, Nepal and Indonesia. There is a dedicated public engagement team, and it is recognised as an important part of the research process. Methods: Through this study we explored the views and needs of local researchers with regards to practicing public engagement. We obtained opinions of 70 researchers through an online survey with both open-ended and closed-ended questions. Results: Most researchers perceived public engagement as improving public science literacy, rather than supporting public participation in science and research. While the participants largely see public engagement as a necessary practice, they experienced four main barriers to taking part in public engagement: time, lack of capacity, lack of support and personal perceptions. Most participants indicated they had somewhat to low confidence to communicate about science to the public. Experience, skill and knowledge, and personal preference emerged as factors that influence their perceived confidence for science communication. In our analysis, experience appeared to be the main factor contributing to researchers' high confidence. Recommendations: We recommended to support researchers by not only providing them with training for skills and knowledge, but also with opportunities to conduct public engagement, and a range of methods to suit their personal styles of communicating. It is also evident that more support is needed to build an enabling institutional environment that gives researchers professional recognition for their engagement work. This study, while modest in its scope, has informed our approach to supporting researcher-led engagement, and may guide other institutes wishing to improve this.

Project description:ObjectivesInformation professionals have supported medical providers, administrators and decision-makers, and guideline creators in the COVID-19 response. Searching COVID-19 literature presented new challenges, including the volume and heterogeneity of literature and the proliferation of new information sources, and exposed existing issues in metadata and publishing. An expert panel developed best practices, including recommendations, elaborations, and examples, for searching during public health emergencies.MethodsProject directors and advisors developed core elements from experience and literature. Experts, identified by affiliation with evidence synthesis groups, COVID-19 search experience, and nomination, responded to an online survey to reach consensus on core elements. Expert participants provided written responses to guiding questions. A synthesis of responses provided the foundation for focus group discussions. A writing group then drafted the best practices into a statement. Experts reviewed the statement prior to dissemination.ResultsTwelve information professionals contributed to best practice recommendations on six elements: core resources, search strategies, publication types, transparency and reproducibility, collaboration, and conducting research. Underlying principles across recommendations include timeliness, openness, balance, preparedness, and responsiveness.ConclusionsThe authors and experts anticipate the recommendations for searching for evidence during public health emergencies will help information specialists, librarians, evidence synthesis groups, researchers, and decision-makers respond to future public health emergencies, including but not limited to disease outbreaks. The recommendations complement existing guidance by addressing concerns specific to emergency response. The statement is intended as a living document. Future revisions should solicit input from a broader community and reflect conclusions of meta-research on COVID-19 and health emergencies.

Project description:IntroductionThe current literature suggests that the frequency and complexity of public health emergencies are rising and this trend will likely continue. From 2000 to 2023, seven events have been declared as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO). Organisational models such as the Incident Management System, Incident Response System and Incident Command System or country-specific models are essential in managing PHEIC.The review aims to achieve four key objectives. First, identify and describe the organisational models used in the South-East Asia Region (SEAR) nations defined by WHO as Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste and DPR Korea for managing PHEICs. Second, explore the indicators used to gauge the effectiveness of these models. Third, assess how these indicators impact the overall success of organisational models. Finally, the review will delve into the implementation aspects gaining a deeper understanding of how the organisational models are put into practice to manage PHEICs in the SEAR region.Methods and analysisFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines, a qualitative evidence synthesis will be conducted. A defined search strategy will be employed to conduct a comprehensive literature search of the following academic databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, WHO Library Database, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and Web of Science; as well as non-academic databases including Google Scholar, Evidence Aid, Epistemonikos, Shodhganga and ResearchGate. This review will employ the SPIDER-D tool for searching qualitative studies. Two reviewers will check the quality of included studies and will be appraised using standard critical appraisal tools. In case of any difference between the two reviewers, a third reviewer will take the decision.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated through a workshop for stakeholders and policymakers.Prospero registration numberCRD42023394418.

Dataset Information

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012-2022) - a systematic review.

Publications

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012-2022) - a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets