Global health and open source software (OSS): An example of legal considerations impacting technology and global health policy implementation

2016 ◽  
pp. 139-154
Author(s):  
Erin N. Hahn
Author(s):  
Jennifer Prah Ruger

The global health governance (GHG) literature frames health variously as a matter of security and foreign policy, human rights, or global public good. Divergence among these perspectives has forestalled the development of a consensus vision for global health. Global health policy will differ according to the frame applied. Fundamentally, GHG today operates on a rational actor model, encompassing a continuum from the purely self-interest-maximizing position at one extreme to a more nuanced approach that takes others’ interests into account when making one’s own calculations. Even where humanitarian concerns are clearly and admirably at play, however, the problem of motivations remains. Often narrow self-interest is also at work, and actors obfuscate this behind altruistic motives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella M. McLoughlin ◽  
Peg Allen ◽  
Callie Walsh-Bailey ◽  
Ross C. Brownson

Abstract Background Governments in some countries or states/provinces mandate school-based policies intended to improve the health and well-being of primary and secondary students and in some cases the health of school staff. Examples include mandating a minimum time spent per week in programmed physical activity, mandating provision of healthy foods and limiting fat content of school meals, and banning tobacco products or use on school campuses. Although school health researchers have studied whether schools, districts, or states/provinces are meeting requirements, it is unclear to what extent implementation processes and determinants are assessed. The purposes of the present systematic review of quantitative measures of school policy implementation were to (1) identify quantitative school health policy measurement tools developed to measure implementation at the school, district, or state/provincial levels; (2) describe the policy implementation outcomes and determinants assessed and identify the trends in measurement; and (3) assess pragmatic and psychometric properties of identified implementation measures to understand their quality and suitability for broader application. Methods Peer-reviewed journal articles published 1995–2020 were included if they (1) had multiple-item quantitative measures of school policy implementation and (2) addressed overall wellness, tobacco, physical activity, nutrition, obesity prevention, or mental health/bullying/social-emotional learning. The final sample comprised 86 measurement tools from 67 peer-review articles. We extracted study characteristics, such as psychometric and pragmatic measure properties, from included articles based on three frameworks: (1) Implementation Outcomes Framework, (2) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and (3) Policy Implementation Determinants Framework. Results Most implementation tools were developed to measure overall wellness policies which combined multiple policy topics (n = 35, 40%) and were in survey form (n = 75, 87%). Fidelity was the most frequently prevalent implementation outcome (n = 70, 81%), followed by adoption (n = 32, 81%). The implementation determinants most assessed were readiness for implementation, including resources (n = 43, 50%), leadership (n = 42, 49%), and policy communication (n = 41, 48%). Overall, measures were low-cost and had easy readability. However, lengthy tools and lack of reported validity/reliability data indicate low transferability. Conclusions Implementation science can contribute to more complete and rigorous assessment of school health policy implementation processes, which can improve implementation strategies and ultimately the intended health benefits. Several high-quality measures of implementation determinants and implementation outcomes can be applied to school health policy implementation assessment. Dissemination and implementation science researchers can also benefit from measurement experiences of school health researchers.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-122
Author(s):  
Abbas Rattani ◽  
Adnan A. Hyder

AbstractThere has been growing consensus to develop relevant guidance to improve the ethical review of global health policy and systems research (HPSR) and address the current absence of formal ethics guidance.


The Lancet ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 385 (9978) ◽  
pp. e42-e44 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Tasioulas ◽  
Effy Vayena

Author(s):  
Jennifer Prah Ruger

This chapter discusses challenges of global health inequalities in the current global health policy system. It then describes provincial globalism and a shared health governance framework as approaches to these challenges. Moral philosophers have for some time argued that global poverty and associated human suffering are universal concerns and that there is a moral obligation, beyond matters of charity, for wealthier countries to do more. Being serious about addressing the problem of global health inequalities requires developing a conception of global health justice. Moreover, addressing global health inequalities requires a reexamination of the norms and principles underlying global institutions in order to offer proposals for a better global health policy. This chapter sketches analytical components of provincial globalism, a framework that takes individuals to be the moral unit in both domestic and global contexts and that improves the prospects of alleviating global health inequalities. Provincial globalism promotes the realization of individuals’ health capabilities and supports a shared health governance that enables institutions to reexamine the objectives, policy goals, and decision-making procedures of the global health architecture. Shared health governance, in turn, provides standards for regulating global and domestic institutions and practices to create the conditions for realizing individuals’ health capabilities.


2016 ◽  
pp. 134-150
Author(s):  
Augustine Nduka Eneanya

The chapter describes policy implementation components of a health system in United States of America and explains how they affect health outcomes (service delivery). It argues that implemented policies affect various components of a health system in terms of service delivery, workforce, information, financing, medical products, technologies, leadership and governance. Using health system as framework of analysis, the paper explains that the outcome of health policy implementation determines the availability, quality and equitability of program service delivery. The chapter goes on to argue that policy implementation barriers, such as demand-and supply-side barriers, market, insufficient resources, cultural barriers, imperfect communication, information, education, coordination, leadership and governance affect the poor and vulnerable groups in developed and developing countries from benefitting from public spending on public health policies and programs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document