BackgroundIndia’s accredited social health activist (ASHA) programme consists of almost one million female community health workers (CHWs). Launched in 2005, there is now an ASHA in almost every village and across many urban centres who support health system linkages and provide basic health education and care. This paper examines how the programme is seeking to address gender inequalities facing ASHAs, from the programme's policy origins to recent adaptations.MethodsWe reviewed all publically available government documents (n = 96) as well as published academic literature (n = 122) on the ASHA programme. We also drew from the embedded knowledge of this paper’s government-affiliated co-authors, triangulated with key informant interviews (n = 12). Data were analysed thematically through a gender lens.ResultsGiven that the initial impetus for the ASHA programme was to address reproductive and child health issues, policymakers viewed volunteer female health workers embedded in communities as best positioned to engage with beneficiaries. From these instrumentalist origins, where the programme was designed to meet health system demands, policy evolved to consider how the health system could better support ASHAs. Policy reforms included an increase in the number and regularity of incentivized tasks, social security measures, and government scholarships for higher education. Residential trainings were initiated to build empowering knowledge and facilitate ASHA solidarity. ASHAs were designated as secretaries of their village health committees, encouraging them to move beyond an all-female sphere and increasing their role in accountability initiatives. Measures to address gender based violence were also recently recommended. Despite these well-intended reforms and the positive gains realized, ongoing tensions and challenges related to their gendered social and employment status remain, requiring continued policy attention and adaptation.ConclusionsGender trade offs and complexities are inherent to sustaining CHW programmes at scale within challenging contexts of patriarchal norms, health system hierarchies, federal governance structures, and evolving aspirations, capacities, and demands from female CHWs. Although still grappling with significant gender inequalities, policy adaptations have increased ASHAs’ access to income, knowledge, career progression, community leadership, and safety. Nonetheless, these transformative gains do not mark linear progress, but rather continued adaptations.

ObjectivesTo understand factors underpinning the accuracy and timeliness of mobile phone numbers and other health information captured in India’s government registry for pregnant and postpartum women. Accurate and timely registration of mobile phone numbers is necessary for beneficiaries to receive mobile health services.SettingMadhya Pradesh and Rajasthan states in India at the community, clinical, and administrative levels of the health system.ParticipantsInterviews (n=59) with frontline health workers (FLHWs), data entry operators, and higher level officials. Focus group discussions (n=12) with pregnant women to discuss experiences with sharing data in the health system. Observations (n=9) of the process of digitization and of interactions between stakeholders for data collection.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThematic analysis identified how key actors experienced the data collection and digitisation process, reasons for late or inaccurate data, and mechanisms that can bolster timeliness and accuracy.ResultsPregnant women were comfortable sharing mobile numbers with health workers, but many were unaware that their data moved beyond their FLHW. FLHWs valued knowing up-to-date beneficiary mobile numbers, but felt little incentive to ensure accuracy in the digital record system. Delays in registering pregnant women in the online portal were attributed to slow movement of paper records into the digital system and difficulties in gathering required documents from beneficiaries. Data, including women’s phone numbers, were handwritten and copied multiple times by beneficiaries and health workers with variable literacy. Supervision tended to focus on completeness rather than accuracy. Health system actors noted challenges with the digital system but valued the broader project of digitisation.ConclusionsIncreased focus on training, supportive supervision, and user-friendly data processes that prioritise accuracy and timeliness should be considered. These inputs can build on existing positive patient–provider relationships and health system actors’ enthusiasm for digitisation.

Objective To conduct a comprehensive mapping of published indicators for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services and outcomes in humanitarian settings. Methods A systematic search of the peer-reviewed and grey literature published between January 2008 and May 2018 was conducted to identify all references describing indicator sets for M&E of SRH services and outcomes in humanitarian settings. The databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Global Health, as well as 85 websites of relevant organizations involved in humanitarian response were searched. Characteristics of identified indicator sets and data from individual indicators was extracted. Findings Of 3278 records identified, 20 met the review’s inclusion criteria and 9 existing indicator sets were identified. A total of 179 relevant indicators were included in the mapping, and removal of duplicates yielded 132 unique indicators. Twenty-seven percent fell within the maternal health domain, followed by the HIV/AIDS domain (26%) and the gender-based violence domain (23%). The distribution of indicators by type (process/output, outcome, impact) was balanced overall but varied substantially across domains. The most commonly used data collection platforms were facility-based systems or population-based surveys. Domains covered and indicator definitions were inconsistent across indicator sets. Conclusion Results demonstrate the need to standardize data collection efforts for M&E of SRH services and outcomes in humanitarian settings and to critically appraise the extent to which different domains should be covered. A core list of indicators is essential for assessing response status over time as well as across countries.

Cognitive interviewing is a qualitative research method for improving the validity of quantitative surveys, which has been underused by academic researchers and monitoring and evaluation teams in global health. Draft survey questions are administered to participants drawn from the same population as the respondent group for the survey itself. The interviewer facilitates a detailed discussion with the participant to assess how the participant interpreted each question and how they formulated their response. Draft survey questions are revised and undergo additional rounds of cognitive interviewing until they achieve high comprehension and cognitive match between the research team’s intent and the target population’s interpretation. This methodology is particularly important in global health when surveys involve translation or are developed by researchers who differ from the population being surveyed in terms of socio-demographic characteristics, worldview, or other aspects of identity. Without cognitive interviewing, surveys risk measurement error by including questions that respondents find incomprehensible, that respondents are unable to accurately answer, or that respondents interpret in unintended ways. This methodological musing seeks to encourage a wider uptake of cognitive interviewing in global public health research, provide practical guidance on its application, and prompt discussion on its value and practice. To this end, we define cognitive interviewing, discuss how cognitive interviewing compares to other forms of survey tool development and validation, and present practical steps for its application. These steps cover defining the scope of cognitive interviews, selecting and training researchers to conduct cognitive interviews, sampling participants, collecting data, debriefing, analysing the emerging findings, and ultimately generating revised, validated survey questions. We close by presenting recommendations to ensure quality in cognitive interviewing.