BackgroundDetermining the health-promoting behaviors of women during the important period of reproduction provides valuable information for designing appropriate intervention programs for advancing women's health. There is no study on the health-promoting behaviors of women of reproductive age in Iran. Thus, the aim of this study is to explore these health-promoting behaviors for the purpose of developing comprehensive and culturally sensitive health advancement strategies for Iranian women.Methods/DesignThis study has a sequential explanatory mixed methods design. The follow-up explanation model is used to elaborate the quantitative results by collecting qualitative data from participants who could best assist in elucidating the results. The study is conducted in two sequential phases. The first phase is a population-based cross-sectional survey in which 1350 Iranian women of reproductive age are selected by proportional random multistage cluster sampling of the 22 main municipal sectors of Tehran, Iran. Questionnaires are completed through a face-to-face interview. The second phase is a qualitative study in which participants are selected using purposive sampling in the form of extreme case sampling on the basis of health-promoting behavior scores. The qualitative phase is based on data collected from focus group discussions or individual in-depth interviews. A conventional qualitative content analysis approach is used, and the data are managed with a computer-assisted program. Women's health-promoting strategies are developed using the qualitative and quantitative results, a review of the related literature, and the nominal group technique among experts.DiscussionThe findings of this mixed methods sequential explanatory study, obtained using a culturally sensitive approach, provide insights into the health behavioral factors that need to be considered if preventive strategies and intervention programs are to be designed to promote women's health in the community.

Background Given the potential of intersectionality to identify the causes of inequalities, there is a growing tendency toward applying it in the field of health. Nevertheless, the extent of the application of intersectionality in designing and implementing health interventions is unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the extent to which previous studies have applied intersectionality and its principles in designing and implementing health interventions. Methods The title and abstract of the articles which were published in different databases e.g. PubMed, Web of Science, Proquest, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and PsychInfo were screened. Those articles that met the screening criteria were reviewed in full text. The data about the application of principles of intersectionality, according to the stages heuristic model (problem identification, design & implementation, and evaluation), were extracted through a 38-item researcher-made checklist. Results Initially, 2677 articles were found through reviewing the target databases. After removing the duplicated ones and screening the titles and abstracts of 1601 studies, 107 articles were selected to be reviewed in detail and 4 articles could meet the criteria. The most frequently considered intersectionality principles were “intersecting categories” and “power”, particularly at the stages of ‘problem identification’ as well as ‘design & implementation’. The results showed that “multilevel analysis” principle received less attention; most of the studies conducted the interventions at the micro level and did not aim at bringing about change at structural levels. There was a lack of clarity regarding the attention to some of the main items of principles such as “reflexivity” as well as “social justice and equity". These principles might have been implemented in the selected articles; however, the authors have not explicitly discussed them in their studies. Conclusions Given the small number of included studies, there is still insufficient evidence within empirical studies to show the implication of intersectionality in designing and conducting health interventions. To operationalize the intersectionality, there is a need to address the principles at various stages of health policies and interventions. To this end, designing and availability of user-friendly tools may help researchers and health policymakers appropriately apply the intersectionality.

Background: During the last decade, the rapid expansion of universal neonatal hearing screening (UNHS) has brought into focus questions about the most appropriate screening technology for this indication. Objectives:The main aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) and otoacoustic emissions (OAE) in universal neonatal hearing screening programs. Methods: This economic study was performed in Iran. A decision tree model was applied for economic evaluation of the AABR and OAE devices used in UNHS. The main inputs of our model included the prevalence of hearing loss in Iran, device sensitivity, specificity and cost per case, as well as definite diagnosis of each newborn. Upon collection, these inputs were analyzed with TreeAge economic analysis software. Sensitivity analysis was conducted upon examining the probability of uncertainty concerning the inputs. Results: For a one-year period and a one-million population of newborns, the UNHS entails a cost of $3,310,700 and detects 4,650 newborns with hearing loss, using the AABR device. However, if the OAE device is used, the cost will be expanded to $3,414,100 and 3,850 newborns with hearing loss will be detected. Consequently, the AABR device costs $103,400 less than the OAE device, and detects 800 more cases than the OAE device. Sensitivity analysis results revealed that the prevalence rate or costs of the gold standard had no effect on displacing the dominant technology. Conclusions: In this study, it was found that the AABR is the cost-effective alternative compared to OAE. AABR dominates OAE, because it has lower expected costs and higher effectiveness.

Background:Development of a manual or well-defined criterion for prioritizing the topics of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) will help validate and organize this process evermore. This study was conducted to design an applicable manual that would prioritize the CPG topics for family physicians.Methods:This study was a multi-stage method using a qualitative approach that was conducted for the manual developing. The manual development process took place in four steps, as follows: Literature review, interviews with ten experts, preparing a list of criteria and determining its appropriateness by applying the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness method, and development of the final draft of the manual and pilot study.Results:Interview transcripts went under content analysis and were classified into eight main groups, 12 subgroups, and 85 themes. A comprehensive list consisting of fifty preliminary criteria were extracted. After summarizing and classifying the criteria, 12 appropriate criteria were evaluated using the RAND appropriateness method. Eventually, based on the literature review and our own results of the interview analysis, a manual consisting of five main sections and one clause on ethics was developed. Later, a pilot study was conducted on ten family physician topics, and prioritized by nine experts.Conclusions:The manual can be eyed as a tool ensuring the quality of the process of prioritizing CPG topics for family physicians, as it takes into account the issues involved in priority-setting. Selecting informed stakeholders for rating the criteria and ranking the topics was an issue that was greatly emphasized by the experts. Eventually, the application of this manual can be the first step toward systematizing the process of prioritizing CPG topics in the country.

Background The spread and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic have been to such an extent that to shape an effective, collective response, governments need the participation of society and the cooperation of a wide range of civil society organizations and institutions. The objective of this study was to identify the activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in response to the covid-19 pandemic in Iran and the challenges they confronted. Methods We conducted a qualitative analysis based on twenty-two individual, virtual, and semi-structured interviews. Interviewees were selected through purposeful and snowball sampling. All interviews were performed with active health-related NGO representatives willing to participate in the study and continued until data saturation. Data analysis was performed using qualitative content analysis. Results The activities and challenges raised by NGO representatives were identified in 6 main categories, including the need for the participation of NGOs in the fight against pandemics, response to the COVID-19 crisis in the society, challenges in providing services to the target group in the COVID-19 crisis, NGOs challenges in interacting with governmental and non-governmental institutions, information sources used by NGOs in the COVID-19 crisis and strategies to support NGOs in their efforts. Conclusion Considering the crucial challenges for their participation, such as the NGO access to the target groups, lack of communication network, and constructive interaction between government institutions and the NGOs, it is recommended to increase the capacity of these institutions and intervene to establish a constructive and long-term relationship with the government.