Challenges in Shaping Health Programmes with Data

Author(s):  
Sarah B. Macfarlane ◽  
Muhammed M. Lecky ◽  
Olufemi Adegoke ◽  
Nkata Chuku
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 344-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Duckett

AbstractThe design of Australia’s Medicare programme was based on the Canadian scheme, adapted somewhat to take account of differences in the constitutional division of powers in the two countries and differences in history. The key elements are very similar: access to hospital services without charge being the core similarity, universal coverage for necessary medical services, albeit with a variable co-payment in Australia, the other. But there are significant differences between the two countries in health programmes – whether or not they are labelled as ‘Medicare’. This paper discusses four areas where Canada could potentially learn from Australia in a positive way. First, Australia has had a national Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for almost 70 years. Second, there have been hesitant extensions to Australia’s Medicare to address the increasing prevalence of people with chronic conditions – extensions which include some payments for allied health professionals, ‘care coordination’ payments, and exploration of ‘health care homes’. Third, Australia has a much more extensive system of support for older people to live in their homes or to move into supported residential care. Fourth, Australia has gone further in driving efficiency in the hospital sector than has Canada. Finally, the paper examines aspects of the Australian health care system that Canada should avoid, including the very high level of out-of-pocket costs, and the role of private acute inpatient provision.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii35-ii46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Soi ◽  
Jessica C Shearer ◽  
Ashwin Budden ◽  
Emily Carnahan ◽  
Nicole Salisbury ◽  
...  

Abstract Vaccination, like most other public health services, relies on a complex package of intervention components, functioning systems and committed actors to achieve universal coverage. Despite significant investment in immunization programmes, national coverage trends have slowed and equity gaps have grown. This paper describes the design and implementation of the Gavi Full Country Evaluations, a multi-country, prospective, mixed-methods approach whose goal was to monitor and evaluate processes, inputs, outputs and outcomes of immunization programmes in Bangladesh, Mozambique, Uganda and Zambia. We implemented the Full Country Evaluations from 2013 to 2018 with the goal of identifying the drivers of immunization programme improvement to support programme implementation and increase equitable immunization coverage. The framework supported methodological and paradigmatic flexibility to respond to a broad range of evaluation and implementation research questions at global, national and cross-country levels, but was primarily underpinned by a focus on evaluating processes and identifying the root causes of implementation breakdowns. Process evaluation was driven by theories of change for each Gavi funding stream (e.g. Health Systems Strengthening) or activity, ranging from global policy development to district-level programme implementation. Mixing of methods increased in relevance and rigour over time as we learned to build multiple methods into increasingly tailored evaluation questions. Evaluation teams in country-based research institutes increasingly strengthened their level of embeddedness with immunization programmes as the emphasis shifted over time to focus more heavily on the use of findings for programme learning and adaptation. Based on our experiences implementing this approach, we recommend it for the evaluation of other complex interventions, health programmes or development assistance.


BMJ ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 281 (6241) ◽  
pp. 677-677
Author(s):  
D. B Jelliffe ◽  
E F P. Jelliffe

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document