scholarly journals Development of a prognostic risk score to aid antibiotic decision-making for children aged 2-59 months with World Health Organization fast breathing pneumonia in Malawi: An Innovative Treatments in Pneumonia (ITIP) secondary analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. e0214583
Author(s):  
Eric D. McCollum ◽  
Siobhan P. Brown ◽  
Evangelyn Nkwopara ◽  
Tisungane Mvalo ◽  
Susanne May ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Organization

Post COVID-19 Potentials and Innovation: The Future Supply Chain

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (SPL1) ◽  
pp. 1054-1057
Author(s):  
Bindu Swetha Pasuluri ◽  
Anuradha S G ◽  
Manga J ◽  
Deepak Karanam
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
World Wide ◽  
World Health ◽  
Future Supply ◽  
Entire World ◽  
Health Organization

An unanticipated outburst of pneumonia of inexperienced in Wuhan, , China stated in December 2019. World health organization has recognized pathogen and termed it COVID-19. COVID-19 turned out to be a severe urgency in the entire world. The influence of this viral syndrome is now an intensifying concern. Covid-19 has changed our mutual calculus of ambiguity. It is more world-wide in possibility, more deeply , and much more difficult than any catastrophe that countries and organizations have ever faced. The next normal requires challenging ambiguity head-on and building it into decision-making. It is examined that every entity involved in running supply chains would require through major as employee, product, facility protocols, and transport would have to be in place. It is an urgent need of structuring to apply the lessons well-read for our supply chain setup. With higher managers now being aware of the intrinsic hazards in their supply chain, key and suggestions-recommendations will help to guide leader to commit to a newly planned, more consistent supply chain setup. Besides, the employees’ mental health is also a great concern.

Building immunization decision-making capacity within the World Health Organization European Region

Vaccine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (33) ◽  
pp. 5109-5113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liudmila Mosina ◽  
Siddhartha Sankar Datta ◽  
Abigail Shefer ◽  
Kathleen F. Cavallaro ◽  
Louise Henaff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
World Health ◽  
European Region ◽  
Decision Making Capacity ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization

scholarly journals Optimising health and economic impacts of COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation strategies in the WHO European Region

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Liu ◽  
Frank G Sandmann ◽  
Rosanna C Barnard ◽  
Carl A.B. Pearson ◽  
Roberta Pastore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
World Health ◽  
European Region ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Roll Out

Background: Countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region differ in terms of the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out speed. We evaluated the health and economic impact of different age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies across this demographically and socio-economically diverse region. Methods: We fitted country-specific age-stratified compartmental transmission models to reported COVID-19 mortality in the WHO European Region to inform the immunity level before vaccine roll-out. Building upon broad recommendations from the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation (SAGE), we examined four strategies that prioritise: all adults (V+), younger (20-59 year-olds) followed by older adults (60+) (V20), older followed by younger adults (V60), and the oldest adults (75+) (V75) followed by incremental expansion to successively younger five-year age groups. We explored four roll-out scenarios based on projections or recent observations (R1-4) - the slowest scenario (R1) covers 30% of the total population by December 2022 and the fastest (R4) 80% by December 2021. Five decision-making metrics were summarised over 2021-22: mortality, morbidity, and losses in comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy (cLE), comorbidity- and quality-adjusted life years (cQALY), and the value of human capital (HC). Six sets of infection-blocking and disease-reducing vaccine efficacies were considered. Findings: The optimal age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies were sensitive to country characteristics, decision-making metrics and roll-out speeds. Overall, V60 consistently performed better than or comparably to V75. There were greater benefits in prioritising older adults when roll-out is slow and when VE is low. Under faster roll-out, V+ was the most desirable option. Interpretation: A prioritisation strategy involving more age-based stages (V75) does not necessarily lead to better health and economic outcomes than targeting broad age groups (V60). Countries expecting a slow vaccine roll-out may particularly benefit from prioritising older adults. Funding: World Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Medical Research Council (United Kingdom), the National Institute of Health Research (United Kingdom), the European Commission, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (United Kingdom), Wellcome Trust  

scholarly journals Introduction to the Special Issue on "The World Health Organization Choosing Interventions That Are Cost-Effective (WHO-CHOICE) Update"

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Y. Bertram ◽  
Tessa Tan Torres Edejer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Over Time

The WHO-CHOICE (World Health Organization CHOosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective) approach is unique in the global health landscape, as it takes a "generalized" approach to cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) that can be seen as a quantitative assessment of current and future efficiency within a health system. CEA is a critical contribution to the process of priority setting and decision-making in healthcare, contributing to deliberative dialogue processes to select services to be funded. WHO-CHOICE provides regional level estimates of cost-effectiveness, along with tools to support country level analyses. This series provides an update to the methodological approach used in WHO-CHOICE and presents updated cost-effectiveness estimates for 479 interventions. Five papers are presented, the first focusing on methodological updates, followed by three results papers on maternal, newborn and child health; HIV, tuberculosis and malaria; and non-communicable diseases and mental health. The final paper presents a set of example universal health coverage (UHC) benefit packages selected through only a value for money lens, showing that all disease areas have interventions which can fall on the efficiency frontier. Critical for all countries is institutionalizing decision-making processes. A UHC benefit package should not be static, as the countries needs and ability to pay change over time. Decisions will need to be continually revised and new interventions added to health benefit packages. This is a vital component of progressive realization, as the package is expanded over time. Developing an institutionalized process ensures this can be done consistently, fairly, and transparently, to ensure an equitable path to UHC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document