scholarly journals Leveraging Open Hardware to Alleviate the Burden of COVID-19 on Global Health Systems

Author(s):  
Tom Baden ◽  
Andre Maia Chagas ◽  
Jennifer Molloy ◽  
Lucia Prieto Godino

With the current rapid spread of COVID-19, global health systems are increasingly overburdened by the sheer number of people that need diagnosis, isolation and treatment. Shortcomings are evident across the board, from staffing, facilities for rapid and reliable testing to availability of hospital beds and key medical-grade equipment. The scale and breadth of the problem calls for an equally substantive response not only from frontline workers such as medical staff and scientists, but from skilled members of the public who have the time, facilities and knowledge to meaningfully contribute to a consolidated global response. Here, we summarise community-driven approaches based on Free and Open Source scientific and medical Hardware (FOSH) currently being developed and deployed to bolster access to personal protective equipment (PPE), patient treatment and diagnostics.

PLoS Biology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. e3000730 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Maia Chagas ◽  
Jennifer C. Molloy ◽  
Lucia L. Prieto-Godino ◽  
Tom Baden

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Murphy ◽  
Erica Di Ruggiero ◽  
Ross Upshur ◽  
Donald J. Willison ◽  
Neha Malhotra ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has been described as the “fourth industrial revolution” with transformative and global implications, including in healthcare, public health, and global health. AI approaches hold promise for improving health systems worldwide, as well as individual and population health outcomes. While AI may have potential for advancing health equity within and between countries, we must consider the ethical implications of its deployment in order to mitigate its potential harms, particularly for the most vulnerable. This scoping review addresses the following question: What ethical issues have been identified in relation to AI in the field of health, including from a global health perspective? Methods Eight electronic databases were searched for peer reviewed and grey literature published before April 2018 using the concepts of health, ethics, and AI, and their related terms. Records were independently screened by two reviewers and were included if they reported on AI in relation to health and ethics and were written in the English language. Data was charted on a piloted data charting form, and a descriptive and thematic analysis was performed. Results Upon reviewing 12,722 articles, 103 met the predetermined inclusion criteria. The literature was primarily focused on the ethics of AI in health care, particularly on carer robots, diagnostics, and precision medicine, but was largely silent on ethics of AI in public and population health. The literature highlighted a number of common ethical concerns related to privacy, trust, accountability and responsibility, and bias. Largely missing from the literature was the ethics of AI in global health, particularly in the context of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Conclusions The ethical issues surrounding AI in the field of health are both vast and complex. While AI holds the potential to improve health and health systems, our analysis suggests that its introduction should be approached with cautious optimism. The dearth of literature on the ethics of AI within LMICs, as well as in public health, also points to a critical need for further research into the ethical implications of AI within both global and public health, to ensure that its development and implementation is ethical for everyone, everywhere.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. e004882
Author(s):  
Yibeltal Assefa ◽  
Charles F Gilks ◽  
Remco van de Pas ◽  
Simon Reid ◽  
Dereje Gedle Gete ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 103985622110250
Author(s):  
Jeffrey C L Looi ◽  
Stephen Allison ◽  
Stephen R Kisely ◽  
Tarun Bastiampillai

Objective: To discuss and reflect upon the role of medical practitioners, including psychiatrists, as health advocates on behalf of patients, carers and staff. Conclusions: Health advocacy is a key professional competency of medical practitioners, and is part of the RANZCP framework for training and continuing professional development. Since advocacy is often a team activity, there is much that is gained experientially from volunteering and working with other more experienced health advocates within structurally and financially independent (of health systems and governments) representative groups (RANZCP, AMA, unions). Doctors may begin with clinically proximate advocacy for improved healthcare in health systems, across the public and private sectors. Health advocacy requires skill and courage, but can ultimately influence systemic outcomes, sway policy decisions, and improve resource allocation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 175797592110035
Author(s):  
Chia Yu Lien ◽  
Yun-Hsuan Wu

The COVID-19 outbreak has created an unprecedented challenge for governments to convey information to the public, and social media has become a critical method of COVID-19 communication in Taiwan. Objectives: This study examines a total of 1128 Facebook posts published by Taiwan’s principal health authority from December 1, 2019 to May 31, 2020. Methods: Using both qualitative and quantitative approaches, this study investigates strategies used by the Taiwan government to communicate the COVID-19 outbreak and public responses toward these strategies. Result: Novel uses of Facebook posts on outbreak communication were identified, including solidarity, reviews of actions, press conferences, and the use of animal and cartoon images. Quantitative results showed that the public responded significantly more frequently to messages generating positive affects, such as posts that reviewed government actions and public efforts; posts that expressed thanks, approval, or comradeship; and posts that paired text with photographs of frontline workers or cute animals. Conclusion: These results suggest that, amid a disease outbreak, the public not only look for updated situations and guidelines but also for affective affirmation from government agencies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. e001786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Schaaf ◽  
Emily Maistrellis ◽  
Hana Thomas ◽  
Bergen Cooper

During his first week in office, US President Donald J Trump issued a presidential memorandum to reinstate and broaden the reach of the Mexico City policy. The Mexico City policy (which was in place from 1985–1993, 1999–2000 and 2001–2009) barred foreign non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that received US government family planning (FP) assistance from using US funds or their own funds for performing, providing counselling, referring or advocating for safe abortions as a method of FP. The renamed policy, Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA), expands the Mexico City policy by applying it to most US global health assistance. Thus, foreign NGOs receiving US global health assistance of nearly any type must agree to the policy, regardless of whether they work in reproductive health. This article summarises academic and grey literature on the impact of previous iterations of the Mexico City policy, and initial research on impacts of the expanded policy. It builds on this analysis to propose a hypothesis regarding the potential impact of PLGHA on health systems. Because PLGHA applies to much more funding than it did in its previous iterations, and because health services have generally become more integrated in the past decade, we hypothesise that the health systems impacts of PLGHA could be significant. We present this hypothesis as a tool that may be useful to others’ and to our own research on the impact of PLGHA and similar exogenous overseas development assistance policy changes.


Author(s):  
Pablo A. González ◽  
Laura L. Gutiérrez ◽  
Juan Carlos Oyanedel ◽  
Héctor Sánchez-Rodríguez

This article presents an exploratory model to classify public attitudes towards health systems financing and organization. It comprises 5 factors (pay-as-you-use, solidarity, willingness to contribute, mixed financing, and public provision) measured by 17 indicators, selected through Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) applied to a sample of Chilean adults. Based on this model, cluster analysis proposed 2 groups: “Taxes-public” and “Insurance-choice,” representing 47% and 53% of interviewees, respectively. The results show differences between groups concerning the evaluation of both health care providers and insurers. The second cluster tends to evaluate them more harshly, showing less willingness to contribute further, less solidarity, more agreement with the current financing arrangement in terms of the mixture and its insurance (as opposed to purchasing of service based on health problems), and more support for choice of provider. These results highlight the need to consider people’s attitudes in the public discussion of health systems financing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document