The Institute for Global Health and Development

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/9

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 208

Integrating healthcare financing for refugees into national health systems: findings from a rapid review of the literature
(Elsevier, 2025-10-16) Bertone, Maria Paola; Palmer, Natasha; Witter, Sophie
As the number of refugees increases and displacement becomes protracted, providing equitable healthcare in sustainable ways is increasingly challenging. The Global Compact for Refugees calls for greater inclusion of refugees in national health systems. However, evidence is limited on the most suitable approaches to achieve integration, including from a health financing perspective. This study reviewed normative and empirical literatures on health financing for refugees, reflecting on existing arrangements, and their level of integration with national health systems. A total of 52 documents were reviewed following a purposeful search of grey and published literature. Data were analysed according to core health financing sub-functions as defined by the WHO, specifically reflecting on pathways and approaches to integration for each. The analysis found that challenges remains in relation to funding for refugee healthcare, and areas of focus concern fair burden-sharing and engagement of development funders. Fund pooling proves to be a potential entry point for integration to reduce fragmentation in health financing through use of existing mechanisms (budgets or social health insurance schemes), despite challenges highlighted in the empirical literature. Fewer documents look at purchasing and benefit packages, and they highlight the importance of tailoring those to the specific needs of refugees. In relation to equity and efficiency, integration is often assumed to lead to improvements, but evidence is limited and issues related to the underlying weaknesses of the national health system might hamper the benefits of integration. Overall, the review findings support the development of hypotheses as to how best support health financing integration processes, and highlight areas for further research.
Navigating power in policy adoption: the political economy of noncommunicable diseases in Sierra Leone
(Elsevier, 2025-10-06) Loffreda, Giulia; Senesi, Reynold; Diaconu, Karin; Idriss, Ayesha; Witter, Sophie
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) represent a rising health burden globally, yet low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly fragile states, face persistent barriers to NCD prevention and control policy adoption and implementation. This qualitative case study examines the factors influencing NCD policy adoption in Sierra Leone, a country that, in recent years, has focused on tackling these conditions. Drawing on 20 key informant interviews and 39 policy documents and media analysis, the study highlights the interplay of global health norms, commercial determinants, and local capacities. Findings reveal how international frameworks like WHO’s ‘best buys’ provide essential guidance but often fail to accommodate local socio-political realities. The analysis underscores how multisectoral coalitions, power dynamics, and commercial interests shape outcomes of policy adoption, while chronic underfunding and donor-driven priorities further complicate governance. Recommendations emphasize the importance of context-sensitive strategies that integrate local knowledge systems, strengthen leadership, and embed implementation research. Ultimately, fostering adaptive, accountable, and well-resourced health systems, supported by global solidarity and coordinated governance reforms, is essential to achieving sustainable NCD responses, particularly in an era marked by fractured multilateralism and weakened collective action, where strengthening local capacities and political commitment becomes even more critical.
Refugee integration in national health systems of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): evidence synthesis and future research agenda
(Elsevier, 2025-09-12) Olabi, Amina; Palmer, Natasha; Bertone, Maria Paola; Loffreda, Giulia; Bou-Orm, Ibrahim; Sempé, Lucas; Vera Espinoza, Marcia; Dakessian, Arek; Kadetz, Paul; Ager, Alastair; Witter, Sophie
This paper reviews evidence on healthcare responses for refugees, documenting the different approaches and their effectiveness and impact in particular in relation to supporting integrating refugees into national health systems. The review adopted a purposeful, iterative approach, utilizing electronic databases, grey literature, and reference lists from relevant studies. A total of 167 studies, primarily from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), focusing on refugees and forcibly displaced persons with empirical data, were included. The review highlights a substantial literature on refugee health and healthcare access, with well-covered areas including delivery models, access barriers, gaps in coverage, and specific health services such as psychosocial care, non-communicable diseases, mental health, and maternal and child health. However, less attention is given to integration models, health system responses, and their impact on system resilience and social cohesion. Few studies examine the costs, feasibility, or sustainability of integration models, and little research focuses on health system perspectives or comparative analyses. Moreover, the host health system's status, capacity, and needs are often underexplored. Some countries are particularly well-represented in studies, e.g. Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Bangladesh, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Uganda. There is however a paucity of data that would provide the basis for more quantitative or analytical evaluation from a systems perspective. This gap highlights the need for further research on effective integration models, their operational aspects, and their long-term impact on local health systems' resilience and sustainability. To support this research agenda, we propose a conceptual framework to provide analytic guidance for future research on healthcare responses for refugees and health system integration.
Health justice in fragile and shock-prone settings: from theory to practice towards building resilient health systems
(BMJ, 2025-09-10) Loffreda, Giulia; Regmi, Shophika; Khalil, Joanna; La, Thazin; Idriss, Ayesha; Raven, Joanna; Witter, Sophie; Mansour, Wesam
Health justice is an emerging imperative in global health and health policy and systems research, particularly in fragile and shock-prone settings where inequities are deepened by political instability, conflict and structural violence. This practice paper explores how the ReBUILD for Resilience consortium has sought to operationalise health justice as a guiding principle and embedded practice in four diverse contexts: Myanmar, Nepal, Lebanon and Sierra Leone. Drawing from political philosophy, public health ethics and the capability approach, we outline a framework that positions health justice not only as an aspiration but also as an actionable, community-rooted agenda that centres equity, power redistribution and inclusive governance. Through participatory action research, political economy analysis and embedded learning sites, the ReBUILD teams engaged with communities and health system actors to co-create interventions that respond to local needs while addressing entrenched exclusion and marginalisation. Country experiences demonstrate both the potential and challenges of advancing health justice: from establishing inclusive Municipal Health Committees and revitalising health facility governance to promoting leadership among marginalised groups such as people with disabilities and displaced populations. This paper reflects on tensions around facilitation, participation and positionality and acknowledges the broader political economy, subnational, national and transnational, that shapes opportunities for transformation. We argue that health justice must be pursued through politically astute, reflexive and participatory research approaches, grounded in long-term relationships and a commitment to amplifying community voices. While the road is complex and contested, the pursuit of health justice is essential for building more equitable, inclusive and resilient health systems in the face of protracted crises and global inequities.
Understanding Resilience in UNRWA Health Response to the Syrian Crisis: Lessons from Causal Loop Analysis
(MIT Press, 2025) Ager, Alastair; Diaconu, Karin; Jamal, Zeina; Alameddine, Mohamad; Fouad, Fouad M.; Witter, Sophie; Blanchet, Karl
1. Group model building gathers key stakeholders together to develop causal loop analysis of health system responses to experienced shocks. 2. Causal loop analysis can identify important resources and strategies supporting health system resilience. 3. Evidence of absorptive, adaptive, and transformative resilience capacities was demonstrated in UNRWA health response to the Syria crisis across Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. 4. Analysis highlights the importance of collateral pathways and redundancy; flexible governance and leadership practices; and an organizational culture that sees challenge as an opportunity for learning and innovation. 5. Such evidence has implications for other health systems seeking to integrate provision of services to refugee populations, as well as for UNRWA itself operating in a context of political instability.
Understanding and addressing mental health needs and non-communicable disease in situations of fragility: RUHF research programme synopsis
(NIHR, 2025) Ager, Alastair; Witter, Sophie; Diaconu, Karin; Wurie, Haja; Samai, Mohamed; Saleh, Shadi
Background: Fragile settings – marked by conflict and political, environmental, social, or economic crisis – present severe challenges to population health and the delivery of services. This is particularly the case for health conditions that require continuity of care such as non-communicable disease and mental ill-health. Objectives: To understand existing patterns of health seeking in relation to noncommunicable disease and mental health and the barriers to equitable access to quality provision. To then evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness and quality of interventions designed to address these conditions in contexts of fragility. Design and methods: Building on a foundation of focused scoping reviews, we used participatory methods – including group model building – to map pathways of access to community and health system resources in relation to non-communicable diseases and mental health. We then used a range of surveys and key informant interviews to evaluate implemented interventions. In addition, we undertook a series of global reviews of relevant topics, such as conceptualisation of fragility, the role of trust in health-seeking for noncommunicable disease care in fragile settings, analysis of policy and funding priorities of global actors regarding non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries, and the political economy of NCD policy adoption and implementation at national level. Setting and participants: Field studies were focused at the district or governorate level in a range of fragile settings, including Lebanon, Sierra Leone, El Salvador and, latterly, Nigeria and Gaza. Participants included service users, (formal and informal) health providers and policy makers. Interventions: Interventions addressing NCDs included treatment protocols for hypertension and diabetes (with report cards and desk guides supporting primary care-based disease management) and a local co-created salt reduction programme (featuring community drama, school outreach and radio messaging). Mental health needs were primarily addressed in relation to the provision of community-based psychosocial support either through specific interventions (including a lay-woman-led problem solving intervention for perinatal women) or the development of assessment tools (such as a Participatory Assessment Tool for Mapping Social Connections) and contextually valid screening measures (including the Sierra Leone Psychological Distress Scale and the Sierra Leone Perinatal Psychological Distress Scale) to inform interventions. The programme also developed relevant training interventions. Main outcome measures: Measures focused on access to, and utilisation and quality of, services, including user perceptions of provision. Results: We identified a range of barriers to effective health provision in fragile settings. These reflected the cultural, political, social, economic particularities of the setting and its health system. However, trust (in specific health providers, within social and community networks, and in government) was consistently found to be a key factor in securing targeted outcomes. The skills, methods and confidence of providers was also found to be an important influence on such outcomes. Providing contextually relevant training, mentorship and tools equipped health providers in primary care settings to maintain effective, evidencebased management of diabetes and hypertension despite the ongoing challenges of their fragile context. Mobilisation of community-level resources to address non-communicable disease and mental health needs was demonstrated as relevant, feasible and potentially effective in all settings. Limitations: There was great diversity across the particular settings studied, as well as ongoing gaps in knowledge in relation to these conditions in particular. Caution should be shown in generalisation of specific findings to other situations that may not share important features. The COVID 19 pandemic disrupted data collection in both Sierra Leone and Lebanon, although the targeted power of studies was generally secured. More generally, the pandemic significantly impacted health systems operations in all settings studied, an influence that is discussed in all relevant papers. Conclusions: The research programme contributed to addressing gaps in the literature regarding effective tools and strategies to strengthen provision regarding mental health and non-communicable disease in fragile settings. Assessment of needs and barriers to accessing services is an important foundation for effective working in such contexts. This is achievable with research methods (such as group model building and remote data capture) that can accommodate the diverse challenges and uncertainty associated with these settings. Incorporating such information in service design – at the level of the community, health facility or policymaker – can secure improvement in access to, and quality of, important services. Donors and policy makers need to attend not just to the drivers of fragility but also to coherent investment in public health systems and in processes of community engagement if health needs are to be meaningfully addressed. Future work: The conceptualisation of fragility (and resilience) developed through this programme is informing the design of community, health system and wider cross-sectoral interventions in fragile contexts through the ReBuild for Resilience programme in settings including Sierra Leone, Lebanon, Myanmar and Nepal. Further work across diverse contexts of fragility is required to both identify common features and principles required for health response in these settings and refine strategies and tools that can readily be adapted to the unique characteristics of any particular context.
Costs and cost-effectiveness of integrated horizontal community health worker programmes in low- and middle-income countries (2015–2024): a scoping literature review
(BMJ Publishing Group, 2025-07-22) O’ Donovan, James; Kumar, Meghan Bruce; Ballard, Madeleine; Mchenga, Martina; Martin, Lily; Dennis, Mardieh; Mantus, Molly; Jiménez, Ariwame; Sirmareza, Trio; Cook, Jessica; Kawooya, Patrick; Aranda, Zeus; Ishimwe, Angele Bienvenue; Praha, Rizky Deco; Finnegan, Karen E.; Ruffing, Katherine; Kok, Maryse; Iberico, Matias; Palazuelos, Daniel; Witter, Sophie; Rao, Megha; Dhillon, Ranu S; Napier, Harriet G; Nkenfack, Marius; Katzen, Linnea Stansert; Makhupula, Lazola; Odera, Margaret; Nshimayesu, Michee; Vaughan, Kelsey
Background Community health workers (CHWs) play a vital role in delivering primary health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), addressing multiple diseases through horizontal programmes. Despite their effectiveness, there is a US$4.4 billion annual funding gap for professional CHW programmes. Some countries have adopted these programmes, while others require stronger economic evidence to justify investments. This study updates a 2015 review, critically examining the costs and cost-effectiveness of horizontal CHW programmes in LMICs. Methods A scoping review was conducted using 10 databases and grey literature, covering studies published between August 2015 and July 2024. Search terms related to ‘Community Health Workers’ and ‘Economic Evaluations’ were used. Studies were screened via Covidence software based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on study methodology, cost and outcomes were extracted, tabulated in Microsoft Excel and analysed. Results A total of 18 studies, covering 42 scenarios, were included. Most studies focused on partial economic evaluations, with cost analyses being the most common method. CHW compensation varied widely, with a median monthly salary of US$265 (range US$3033 ($148 (Ethiopia)–$3181 (Malawi)); IQR US$346 (US$203–US$549)). The most commonly reported cost metric was the annual cost per capita, with a median of $6.02 (range: $0.29–$67.95). Sensitivity analyses were conducted in 29% of the scenarios, with six scenarios concluding CHW programmes were cost-effective. However, most did not conclude on cost-effectiveness or affordability, highlighting gaps in the evidence base. Service provision was the most frequently reported outcome, while cost per outcome and affordability were under-reported. Conclusions This review highlights gaps in the economic evaluation of horizontal CHW programmes, particularly in cost-effectiveness and affordability. More large-scale evaluations are needed to inform national health policies and support sustained investment in CHW programmes to strengthen health systems and address workforce shortages.
Understanding the political economy of reforming global health initiatives – insights from global and country levels
(Springer, 2025-07-09) Witter, Sophie; Palmer, Natasha; Jouhaud, Rosemary; Zaidi, Shehla; Carillon, Severine; English, Rene; Loffreda, Giulia; Venables, Emilie; Habib, Shifa Salman; Tan, Jeff; Hane, Fatouma; Bertone, Maria Paola; Hosseinalipour, Seyed-Moeen; Ridde, Valery; Shoaib, Asad; Faye, Adama; Dudley, Lilian; Daniels, Karen; Blanchet, Karl
Introduction Since 2000, the number and role of global health initiatives (GHIs) has been growing, with these platforms playing an increasingly important role in pooling and disbursing funds dedicated to specific global health priorities. While recognising their important contribution, there has also been a growth in concerns about distortions and inefficiencies linked to the GHIs and attempts to improve their alignment with country health systems. There is a growing momentum to adjust GHIs to the current broader range of global health threats, such as non-communicable diseases, humanitarian crises and climate change, and against the backdrop of the recent aid cuts. However, reform attempts are challenged by the political economy of the current structures. Methods In this article, we draw on research conducted as part of the Future of Global Health Initiatives process. The study adopted a cross-sectional, mixed-methods approach, drawing from a range of data sources and data collection methods, including a global and regional level analysis as well as three embedded country case studies in Pakistan, South Africa and Senegal. All data was collected from February to July 2023. 271 documents were analysed in the course of the study, along with data from 335 key informants and meeting participants in 66 countries and across a range of constituencies. For this paper, data were analysed using a political economy framework which focused on actors, context (especially governance and financing) and framing. Findings In relation to actors, the GHIs themselves have become increasingly complex (both internally and in their interrelations with other global health actors and one another). They have a large range of clients (including at national level and amongst multilateral agencies) which function as collaborators as well as competitors. Historically there have been few incentives for any of the actors to maximise collaboration given the competitive funding landscape. Power to exert pressure for reforms sits ultimately with bilateral and private funders, though single-issue northern non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are also cited as important influencers. Funders have not collaborated to enable reforms, despite concerns amongst a number of them, because of the helpful functional role of GHIs, which serves funder interests. Some key global boards are reported to be engineered for stasis, and there are widespread concerns about lack of transparency and over-claiming (by some GHIs) of their results. Framing of narratives about achievements and challenges is important to enable or block reforms and are vigorously contested, with stakeholders often selecting different outcomes to emphasise in justifying positions. Conclusion GHIs have played an important role in the global health ecosystem but despite formal accountability structures to include recipient governments, substantive accountability has been focused upwards to funders, with risk management strategies which prioritise tracking resources more than improved national health system performance. Achieving consensus on reforms will be challenging but current funding pressures and new threats are creating a sense of urgency, which may shift positions. Political economy analysis can model and influence these debates.
Diaspora as partners: strengthening resilience of health systems and communities amidst aid volatility [Commentary]
(BMJ Publishing Group, 2025-06-19) Dafallah, Alaa; Witter, Sophie
The global aid landscape is experiencing unprecedented volatility. Aid has been cut, abruptly, with devastating consequences for health systems and communities across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly aid-dependent fragile settings. The US government’s January 2025 stop work order froze $40 billion in foreign assistance, disrupting 1400+ programmes across 133 countries.1 Recently, the UK government announced reducing aid budgets from 0.5% to 0.33% of gross national income (GNI), effectively halving their overseas development assistance (ODA) commitments.2 The Netherlands and Sweden had previously announced significant aid cuts, and it is likely that more countries will follow suit. These disruptions have spurred critical conversations on domestic resource mobilisation and sustainable financing for essential health services and health systems in LMICs.3 We bring to this conversation an urgent consideration: the critical, overlooked and underutilised value of diaspora and their contributions for health systems in LMICs and fragile and shock-prone settings. We discuss modalities through which diaspora contributes to the resilience of health systems and communities in these contexts, concluding with recommendations to strengthen the role of diaspora in this space.
Health financing
(Oxford University Press, 2025-05-02) Witter, Sophie

The Institute for Global Health and Development

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results