BackgroundLong-term exposure to particulate matter (PM) has essential and profound effects on human health, but most current studies focus on high-income countries. Evidence of the correlations between PM and health effects in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially the risk factor PM1 (particles < 1 mu m in size), remains unclear. ObjectiveTo explore the effects of long-term exposure to particulate matter on the morbidity and mortality of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases in LMICs. MethodsA systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases from inception to May 1, 2022. Cohort studies and case-control studies that examine the effects of PM1, PM2.5, and PM10 on the morbidity and mortality of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases in LMICs were included. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes were analyzed via a random effects model and are reported as the relative risk (RR) with 95% CI. ResultsOf the 1,978 studies that were identified, 38 met all the eligibility criteria. The studies indicated that long-term exposure to PM2.5, PM10, and PM1 was associated with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases: (1) Long-term exposure to PM2.5 was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity (RR per 1.11 mu g/m(3), 95% CI: 1.05, 1.17) and mortality (RR per 1.10 mu g/m(3), 95% CI: 1.06, 1.14) and was significantly associated with respiratory mortality (RR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.25, 1.38) and morbidity (RR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.04); (2) An increased risk of respiratory mortality was observed in the elderly (65+ years) (RR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.47) with long-term exposure to PM2.5; (3) Long-term exposure to PM10 was associated with cardiovascular morbidity (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01, 1.13), respiratory morbidity (RR 1.43, 95% CI: 1.21, 1.69) and respiratory mortality (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.10, 1.49); (4) A significant association between long-term exposure to PM1 and cardiovascular disease was also observed. ConclusionsLong-term exposure to PM2.5, PM10 and PM1 was all related to cardiovascular and respiratory disease events. PM2.5 had a greater effect than PM10, especially on respiratory diseases, and the risk of respiratory mortality was significantly higher for LMICs than high-income countries. More studies are needed to confirm the effect of PM1 on cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.

Vaccination decision making in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has become increasingly complex, particularly in the context of numerous competing health challenges. LMICs have to make difficult choices on which vaccines to prioritize for introduction while considering a wide range of factors such as disease burden, vaccine impact, vaccine characteristics, financing and health care infrastructures, whilst adapting to each country's specific contexts. Our scoping review reviewed the factors that influence decision-making among policymakers for the introduction of new vaccines in LMICs. We identified the specific data points that are factored into the decision-making process for new vaccine introduction, whilst also documenting whether there have been any changes in decision-making criteria in new vaccine introduction over the last two decades. A comprehensive database search was conducted using a search strategy consisting of key terms and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) phrases related to policy, decision-making, vaccine introduction, immunization programmes and LMICs. Articles were screened following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A total of 843 articles were identified, with 34 articles retained after abstract screening, full-text screening and grading with the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT). The Burchett framework for new vaccine introduction was used to identify indicators for vaccine-decision making and guided data extraction. Articles in our study represented a diverse range of perspectives and methodologies. Across articles, the importance of the disease, which included disease burden, costs of disease and political prioritization, coupled with economic factors related to vaccine price, affordability and financing were the most common criteria considered for new vaccine introduction. Our review identified two additional criteria in the decision-making process for vaccine introduction that were not included in the Burchett framework: communication and sociocultural considerations. Data from this review can support informed decision-making for vaccine introduction amongst policymakers and stakeholders in LMICs.

Background: Gestational weight gain (GWG) below or above the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations has been associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Few studies have examined the effect of prenatal nutrient supplementations on GWG in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Objectives: We aimed to investigate the effects of multiple micronutrient supplements (MMSs) and small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements (LNSs) on GWG in LMICs. Methods: A 2-stage meta-analysis of individual participant data was conducted to examine the effects of MMSs (45,507 women from 14 trials) and small-quantity LNSs (6237 women from 4 trials) on GWG compared with iron and folic acid supplements only. Percentage adequacy of GWG and total weight gain at delivery were calculated according to the IOM 2009 guidelines. Binary outcomes included severely inadequate (percentage adequacy 125%) GWG. Results from individual trials were pooled using fixed-effects inverse-variance models. Heterogeneity was examined using I2, stratified analysis, and meta-regression. Results: MMSs resulted in a greater percentage adequacy of GWG [weighted mean difference (WMD): 0.86%; 95% CI: 0.28%, 1.44%; P < 0.01] and higher GWG at delivery (WMD: 209 g; 95% CI: 139, 280 g; P < 0.01) than among those in the control arm. Women who received MMSs had a 2.9% reduced risk of severely inadequate GWG (RR: 0.971; 95% CI: 0.956, 0.987; P < 0.01). No association was found between small-quantity LNSs and GWG percentage adequacy (WMD: 1.51%; 95% CI: -0.38%, 3.40%; P = 0.21). Neither MMSs nor small-quantity LNSs were associated with excessive GWG. Conclusions: Maternal MMSs were associated with greater GWG percentage adequacy and total GWG at delivery than was iron and folic acid only. This finding is consistent with previous results on birth outcomes and will inform policy development and local recommendations of switching routine prenatal iron and folic acid supplements to MMSs.

Background: Nurses provide 90% of health care worldwide, yet little is known of the experiences of nurses and midwives in policy development in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Objective: To identify, appraise and synthesize the qualitative evidence on the experiences of nurses' and midwives' involvement in policy development LMICs. Design: A qualitative systematic review using modified Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Setting: Low and middle-income countries. Participants: Nurses' and midwives' involved in policy development, implementation, and/or evaluation. Methods: A systematic search was undertaken across nine databases to retrieve published studies in English between inception and April of 2021. Screening, critical appraisal, and data extraction was undertaken by two independent reviewers. Results: Ten articles met inclusion criteria. All studies were published between 2000 to 2021 from a variety of LMICs. The studies were medium to high quality (70-100% critical appraisal scores). Four major themes were identified related to policy development: 1) Marginal representation of nurses; 2) Determinants of nurses' involvement (including at the individual, organization, and systematic level); 3) Leadership as a pathway to involvement; 4) Promoting nurses' involvement. Conclusion: All studies demonstrated that nurses and nurse midwives continue to be minimally involved in policy development. Findings reveal reasons for nurses' limited involvement and strategies to foster sustained engagement of nurses in policy development in LMICs. To enhance their involvement in policy development in LMICs, change is needed at multiple levels. Systemic power relations need to be reconstructed to facilitate more collaborative interdisciplinary practices with nurses co-leading and co-developing health care policies.

Background: Routine health information systems (RHISs) support resource allocation and management decisions at all levels of the health system, as well as strategy development and policy-making in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although RHIS data represent a rich source of information, such data are currently underused for research purposes, largely due to concerns over data quality. Given that substantial investments have been made in strengthening RHISs in LMICs in recent years, and that there is a growing demand for more real-time data from researchers, this systematic review builds upon the existing literature to summarize the extent to which RHIS data have been used in peer-reviewed research publications. Methods: Using terms 'routine health information system', 'health information system', or 'health management information system' and a list of LMICs, four electronic peer-review literature databases were searched from inception to February 202,019: PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and EconLit. Articles were assessed for inclusion based on pre-determined eligibility criteria and study characteristics were extracted from included articles using a piloted data extraction form. Results: We identified 132 studies that met our inclusion criteria, originating in 37 different countries. Overall, the majority of the studies identified were from Sub-Saharan Africa and were published within the last 5 years. Malaria and maternal health were the most commonly studied health conditions, although a number of other health conditions and health services were also explored. Conclusions: Our study identified an increasing use of RHIS data for research purposes, with many studies applying rigorous study designs and analytic methods to advance program evaluation, monitoring and assessing services, and epidemiological studies in LMICs. RHIS data represent an underused source of data and should be made more available and further embraced by the research community in LMIC health systems.

Introduction: Given the changing global nutrition landscape, the double burden of malnutrition is a major public health challenge in many developing countries. The main aim of this study is to estimate the double burden of malnutrition among children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This study used cross-sectional data from Demographic and Health Surveys (2001-2016). A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the prevalence of malnutrition indicators in 595,975 children under five years from 65 LMICs. Significant heterogeneity was detected among the various surveys (I2 >50%), hence a random-effect model was used. Sensitivity analysis was also performed, to examine the effects of outliers. Results: The pooled estimate for stunting, wasting, underweight, and overweight/obesity was 29.0%, 7.5%, 15.5%, and 5.3% respectively. Countries with the highest coexistence of undernutrition and overweight/obesity were: South Africa (stunting 27.4% (95% CI: 25.1, 29.8); overweight/obesity 13.3% (95% CI: 11.5, 15.2)), Sao Tome and Principe (stunting 29.0% (95% CI: 26.8, 31.4); overweight/obesity 10.5% (95% CI: 9.0, 12.1)), Swaziland (stunting 28.9% (95% CI: 27.3, 30.6); overweight/obesity 10.8% (95% CI: 9.7, 12.0)), Comoros (stunting 30.0% (95% CI: 28.3, 31.8); overweight/obesity 9.3% (95% CI: 8.3, 10.5)), and Equatorial Guinea (stunting 25.9% (95% CI: 23.4, 28.7); overweight/obesity 9.7% (95% CI: 8.0, 11.6)). Conclusions: There is an urgent need to strengthen existing policies on child malnutrition to integrate and scale up opportunities for innovative approaches which address the double burden of malnutrition in children under five years in LMICs.

Introduction: Information on immunization delivery costs (IDCs) is essential for better planning and budgeting for the sustainability and performance of national programs. However, delivery cost evidence is fragmented and of variable quality, making it difficult for policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to understand and use. This study aimed to consolidate and summarize the evidence on delivery costs, answering the question: What are the unit costs of vaccine delivery across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and through a variety of delivery strategies? Methods: We conducted a systematic review of over 15,000 published and unpublished resources from 2005 to 2018 that included IDCs in LMICs. We quality-rated and extracted data from 61 resources that contained 410 immunization delivery unit costs (e.g., cost per dose, cost per fully immunized child). We converted cost findings to a common year (2016) and currency (U.S. dollars) to ensure comparability across studies and settings. We performed a descriptive and gap analysis and developed immunization delivery cost ranges using comparable unit costs for single vaccines and schedules of vaccines. Results: The majority of IDC evidence comes from low-income countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. Most unit costs are presented as cost per dose and represent health facility-based delivery. Discussion: The cost ranges may be higher than current estimates used in many LMICs for budgeting: $0.16-$2.54 incremental cost per dose (including economic, financial, and fiscal costs) for single, newly introduced vaccines, and $0.75-$9.45 full cost per dose (economic costs) for schedules of four to eight vaccines delivered to children under one. Conclusions: Despite increased attention on improving coverage and strengthening immunization delivery, evidence on the cost of delivery is nascent but growing. The cost ranges can inform planning and policymaking, but should be used with caution given their width and the few unit costs used in their development.

The Global Vaccine Action Plan proposes that every country establish or have access to a National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) by 2020. The NITAG role is to produce evidence-informed recommendations that incorporate local context, to guide national immunization policies and practice. This study aimed to explore the value and effectiveness of NITAGs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), identifying areas in which NITAGs may require further support to improve their functionality and potential barriers to global investment. A multi-methods study design was used, comprising 134 semi-structured interviews and 82 literature review sources that included 38 countries. Interviews were conducted with 53 global/regional and 81 country-level participants able to provide insight into NITAG effectiveness, including NITAG members, national immunization programme staff, and global agency representatives (e.g. the World Health Organisation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Gavi the Vaccine Alliance). The review, including published and unpublished sources on NITAGs in LMICs, was conducted to supplement and corroborate interview findings. Data were analysed thematically. NITAGs were described as valuable in promoting evidence-informed vaccination decision-making, with NITAG involvement enhancing national immunization programme strength and sustainability. Challenges to NITAG effectiveness included: (1) unreliable funding; (2) insufficient diversity of member expertise; (3) inadequate conflicts of interest management procedures; (4) insufficient capacity to access and use evidence; (5) lack of transparency; and (6) limited integration with national decision-making processes that reduced the recognition and incorporation of NITAG recommendations. LMIC NITAGs have developed significantly in the past decade. Well-functioning NITAGs were trusted national resources that enhanced country ownership of immunization provision. However, many LMIC NITAGs require additional technical and funding support to strengthen quality and effectiveness, while maintaining impartiality and ensuring sufficient integration with national decision-making processes. Barriers to sustainable global support need to be addressed for LMIC NITAGs to both continue and develop further.

Background: The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidence-policy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English. Results: From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out 'agenda-setting', we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting. Conclusion: Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs.

Background: The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidence-policy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English. Results: From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out 'agenda-setting', we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting. Conclusion: Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs.

Aims: We performed a systematic review to evaluate stroke presentation, evaluation, management, and outcomes among studies conducted in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). Methods: We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), and the Global Health (EBSCOhost) databases between January 2005 and June 2017 for studies conducted in LMICs defined by the World Bank. We pooled prevalence estimates using an inverse-variance weighting method and stratified by the country income group. Results: The search identified 36 hospital-based studies (64,256 participants) in LMICs. Mean (SD) age ranged from 51 (14) to 72 (12) years, and 29-56% of patients were women. Hypertension was the most commonly reported risk factor (64% [95% CI 59-69]). In settings where MRI was not used, head CT scans were reported among 90% patients (95% CI 79-97). Overall, 3% (95% CI 2-4) of patients were treated with tissue plasminogen activator, and 78% (95% CI 66-88) were treated with antiplatelet therapy. Overall, the rate of in-hospital mortality was 14% (95% CI 10-19), and the rate of in-hospital pneumonia was 17% (95% CI 14-20). Conclusions: Our review revealed the low use of evidence-based practices for acute stroke care in LMIC. The true use in hospitals that do not conduct this research is probably even lower. Strategies to evaluate and improve health system performance for acute stroke care, including implantation of stroke units and making thrombolysis more available and affordable are needed in LMIC. (c) 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel

Aims: We performed a systematic review to evaluate stroke presentation, evaluation, management, and outcomes among studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Methods: We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), and the Global Health (EBSCOhost) databases between January 2005 and June 2017 for studies conducted in LMICs defined by the World Bank. We pooled prevalence estimates using an inverse-variance weighting method and stratified by the country income group. Results: The search identified 36 hospital-based studies (64,256 participants) in LMICs. Mean (SD) age ranged from 51 (14) to 72 (12) years, and 29-56% of patients were women. Hypertension was the most commonly reported risk factor (64% [95% CI 59-69]). In settings where MRI was not used, head CT scans were reported among 90% patients (95% CI 79-97). Overall, 3% (95% CI 2-4) of patients were treated with tissue plasminogen activator, and 78% (95% CI 66-88) were treated with antiplatelet therapy. Overall, the rate of in-hospital mortality was 14% (95% CI 10-19), and the rate of in-hospital pneumonia was 17% (95% CI 14-20). Conclusions: Our review revealed the low use of evidence-based practices for acute stroke care in LMIC. The true use in hospitals that do not conduct this research is probably even lower. Strategies to evaluate and improve health system performance for acute stroke care, including implantation of stroke units and making thrombolysis more available and affordable are needed in LMIC. Registration in Prospero: CRD42017069325.