Saving Lives in Health: Global Estimates and Country Measurement

Low‐Beer, Daniel; Komatsu, Ryuichi; Kunii, Osamu

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001523

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The size of key populations can be estimated using different methods, each having strengths and weaknesses [ 11 ]. Multiple methods are recommended to generate an estimate at a specific site for a given group [ 12 ]. Extrapolations from a single or a few sites to generate a national estimate can be a simple applications of the proportion of estimated group members obtained from the site (s) with estimation exercises to the total adult population applied to the remaining geographic areas, or a complex approach by accounting for other factors: socio-economic factors, geographic area, and different subgroups [ 13 – 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Availability and Quality of Size Estimations of Female Sex Workers, Men Who Have Sex with Men, People Who Inject Drugs and Transgender Women in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo assess the availability and quality of population size estimations of female sex workers (FSW), men who have sex with men (MSM), people who inject drug (PWID) and transgender women.MethodsSize estimation data since 2010 were retrieved from global reporting databases, Global Fund grant application documents, and the peer-reviewed and grey literature. Overall quality and availability were assessed against a defined set of criteria, including estimation methods, geographic coverage, and extrapolation approaches. Estimates were compositely categorized into ‘nationally adequate’, ‘nationally inadequate but locally adequate’, ‘documented but inadequate methods’, ‘undocumented or untimely’ and ‘no data.’FindingsOf 140 countries assessed, 41 did not report any estimates since 2010. Among 99 countries with at least one estimate, 38 were categorized as having nationally adequate estimates and 30 as having nationally inadequate but locally adequate estimates. Multiplier, capture-recapture, census and enumeration, and programmatic mapping were the most commonly used methods. Most countries relied on only one estimate for a given population while about half of all reports included national estimates. A variety of approaches were applied to extrapolate from sites-level numbers to national estimates in two-thirds of countries.ConclusionsSize estimates for FSW, MSM, PWID and transgender women are increasingly available but quality varies widely. The different approaches present challenges for data use in design, implementation and evaluation of programs for these populations in half of the countries assessed. Guidance should be further developed to recommend: a) applying multiple estimation methods; b) estimating size for a minimum number of sites; and, c) documenting extrapolation approaches.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Availability and Quality of Size Estimations of Female Sex Workers, Men Who Have Sex with Men, People Who Inject Drugs and Transgender Women in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, organizations such as the Global Fund to End HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria contributed to saving millions of lives through the availability of antiretroviral drugs and insecticidetreated bed nets. In addition, global health statistics previously accessible to only public health professionals were simplified and made available to millions of people by organizations like Gapminder and Worldmapper enabling increased participation of the public [3][4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostics as the Key to Advances in Global Health: Proposed Methods for Making Reliable Diagnostics Widely Available

Melander¹,

Sivarasu

Yekinni

et al. 2020

Journal of Medical Devices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a structure and method for the development of an AI diagnostic system as a highly leveraged step toward improvements in delivery of healthcare in underserved regions. First, the paper provides a high-level, general review of the current efforts to provide healthcare services in underserved areas and the many efforts being made to impact health outcomes by various international, governmental, and NGO entities. We also very briefly review university programs and research institutions that have specific technical and institutional assets with significant potential to carry out research or to partially implement such a plan. Our review uses weighted values in a decisionsystem that takes in a variety of assets we consider fundamental to successful engagement in delivery of new, innovative, technology-enabled healthcare systems for underresourced settings. We then review nine factors that hinder the advancement in healthcare in under-resourced settings, some of which are well described in current literature and some that may bring new perspectives. The paper then attempts to review how a proposed system can manage to operate successfully within the context of the nine named hindrance factors. The primary focus of the paper is in the description of a system which can increase the availability of diagnostics through technology-enabled systems. Such a system would impact the outcomes of persons in underserved regions. The paper then describes why making diagnostics available is a critical priority among efforts for improvements in global health.

show abstract

“…The first type is rooted in epidemiology and focuses on understanding the present burden of disease and the reduction in that burden (ie, morbidity and mortality) that a project or policy could achieve. Most recently, the ‘lives saved’ terminology has been adopted by agencies such as the Global Fund and used to drive evidence–based health policy [ 4 ]. To support this, resources have been invested (eg, by the UN agencies and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington–Seattle) in generating more comprehensive and detailed estimates of global, regional and national disease burden and in getting this information into the hands of decision–makers [ 5 ].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving health aid for a better planet: The planning, monitoring and evaluation tool (PLANET)

Sridhar

Car

Chopra

et al. 2015

Journal of Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInternational development assistance for health (DAH) quadrupled between 1990 and 2012, from US$ 5.6 billion to US$ 28.1 billion. This generates an increasing need for transparent and replicable tools that could be used to set investment priorities, monitor the distribution of funding in real time, and evaluate the impact of those investments.MethodsIn this paper we present a methodology that addresses these three challenges. We call this approach PLANET, which stands for planning, monitoring and evaluation tool. Fundamentally, PLANET is based on crowdsourcing approach to obtaining information relevant to deployment of large–scale programs. Information is contributed in real time by a diverse group of participants involved in the program delivery.FindingsPLANET relies on real–time information from three levels of participants in large–scale programs: funders, managers and recipients. At each level, information is solicited to assess five key risks that are most relevant to each level of operations. The risks at the level of funders involve systematic neglect of certain areas, focus on donor’s interests over that of program recipients, ineffective co–ordination between donors, questionable mechanisms of delivery and excessive loss of funding to “middle men”. At the level of managers, the risks are corruption, lack of capacity and/or competence, lack of information and /or communication, undue avoidance of governmental structures / preference to non–governmental organizations and exclusion of local expertise. At the level of primary recipients, the risks are corruption, parallel operations / “verticalization”, misalignment with local priorities and lack of community involvement, issues with ethics, equity and/or acceptability, and low likelihood of sustainability beyond the end of the program’s implementation.InterpretationPLANET is intended as an additional tool available to policy–makers to prioritize, monitor and evaluate large–scale development programs. In this, it should complement tools such as LiST (for health care/interventions), EQUIST (for health care/interventions) and CHNRI (for health research), which also rely on information from local experts and on local context to set priorities in a transparent, user–friendly, replicable, quantifiable and specific, algorithmic–like manner.

show abstract

Saving Lives in Health: Global Estimates and Country Measurement

Abstract: Daniel Low-Beer and colleagues provide a response from The Global Fund on the PLOS Medicine article by David McCoy and colleagues critiquing their lives saved assessment models. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Availability and Quality of Size Estimations of Female Sex Workers, Men Who Have Sex with Men, People Who Inject Drugs and Transgender Women in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Availability and Quality of Size Estimations of Female Sex Workers, Men Who Have Sex with Men, People Who Inject Drugs and Transgender Women in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Diagnostics as the Key to Advances in Global Health: Proposed Methods for Making Reliable Diagnostics Widely Available

Improving health aid for a better planet: The planning, monitoring and evaluation tool (PLANET)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About