Exploring hepatitis C virus testing and treatment engagement over time in Melbourne, Australia: a study protocol for a longitudinal cohort study (EC-Experience Cohort study)

IntroductionThe advent of direct acting antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus (HCV) means the elimination of HCV is possible but requires sustained effort to achieve. Between 2016 and 2019, 44% of those living with HCV were treated in Australia. However, treatment uptake has declined significantly. In Australia, people who inject drugs (PWID) are the population most at risk of HCV acquisition. Eliminating HCV in Australia will require nuanced understanding of the barriers to HCV treatment experienced by PWID and tailored interventions to address these barriers. The EC-Experience Cohort study aims to explore the barriers and enablers reported by PWID to engagement in HCV care.Methods and analysisThe EC-Experience Cohort study is a prospective cohort of PWID, established in Melbourne, Australia in 2018. Participants are assigned into three study groups: (1) those not currently engaged in HCV testing; (2) those diagnosed with HCV but not currently engaged in treatment and (3) those completed treatment. Participants complete a total of four interviews every 6 months across an 18-month study period. Predictors of experience of key outcome events along the HCV care cascade will be explored over time.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the EC-Experience Cohort study was obtained by the Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee in Melbourne, Australia (Project Number: HREC/16/Alfred/164). All eligible participants are assessed for capacity to consent and partake in a thorough informed consent process. Results from the EC-Experience Cohort study will be disseminated via national and international scientific and public health conferences and peer-reviewed journal publications. Data from the EC-Experience Cohort study will improve the current understanding of the barriers to HCV care for PWID and guide the tailoring of service provision for specific subgroups. Understanding the barriers and how to increase engagement in care of PWID is critical to achieve HCV elimination goals.

Conference equity in global health: a systematic review of factors impacting LMIC representation at global health conferences

IntroductionGlobal health conferences are important platforms for knowledge exchange, decision-making and personal and professional growth for attendees. Neocolonial patterns in global health at large and recent opinion reports indicate that stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) may be under-represented at such conferences. This study aims to describe the factors that impact LMIC representation at global health conferences.MethodsA systematic review of articles reporting factors determining global health conference attendance was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles presenting conference demographics and data on the barriers and/or facilitators to attendance were included. Articles were screened at title and abstract level by four independent reviewers. Eligible articles were read in full text, analysed and evaluated with a risk of bias assessment.ResultsAmong 8765 articles screened, 46 articles met inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis yielded two themes: ‘barriers to conference attendance’ and ‘facilitators to conference attendance’. In total, 112 conferences with 254 601 attendees were described, of which 4% of the conferences were hosted in low-income countries. Of the 98 302 conference attendees, for whom affiliation was disclosed, 38 167 (39%) were from LMICs.Conclusion‘Conference inequity’ is common in global health, with LMIC attendees under-represented at global health conferences. LMIC attendance is limited by systemic barriers including high travel costs, visa restrictions and lower acceptance rates for research presentations. This may be mitigated by relocating conferences to visa-friendly countries, providing travel scholarships and developing mentorship programmes to enable LMIC researchers to participate in global conferences.

Social control: knowledge and attitude of professionals in the Academia da Cidade Program

The aim of this study was to describe the knowledge and attitude of professionals in the Academia da Cidade Program (ACP) in relation to social control. A cross-sectional, descriptive study with a quantitative and qualitative approach was carried out, using a self-administered questionnaire. The data were tabulated using the EpiData Entry v program. 3.1. For the analysis of the quantitative data, SPSS software version 10.0 was used, results were presented in relative and absolute frequencies. For qualitative analysis, the Content Analysis proposed by Bardin was used. 104 professionals participated, who understand social control with "Participation of users, workers and managers in the planning, formulation, evaluation and inspection of health actions, plans, projects and programs". The majority (61.5%) participated in health conferences, considered this participation as very important (62.5%). Moreover, the great majority (81.7%) encouraged users to participate in social control spaces, as well as, valued and reflected (93.3%) on the demands indicated by them. However, more than 90.0% did not participate in health councils and territorial meetings. As a result, it was found that the majority of ACP professionals know social control according to the theoretical framework of the Unified Health System. As for the attitude, they participated in conferences, encouraged users to be participative and valued the claims brought by their routine work in the Program. However, they did not participate in the health councils and the social control spaces within their territory. It is suggested that these findings guide educational and training actions at the municipal and state levels.

12.I. Skills building seminar: Making the elevator pitch more effective: how to convince a policymaker in less than 2 minutes

Since a number of years, the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), the European Public Health Conferences and other associations, have been working hard to translate the evidence in a such a format that policymakers take notice. For example, the WHO Regional Office for Europe works on 'telling the public health narrative' and provides factsheets and infographics, in order to effectively communicate public health messages to policymakers. At the European Public Health Conference so-called pitch presentations were introduced (at Glasgow 2014), where researchers are asked to present their work in 5 minutes with maximum 5 slides (no animations), as a way to learn to present key messages from research in just a few minutes. EUPHA has organised several skills building workshops on translation of evidence in the past years, including last year's session 'making the elevator pitch work'. Lessons learned during this workshop in Marseille are: Have a clear ask (keep it simple)Appeal to the policymaker's own interests and prioritiesSpell out how action will be beneficial for the policymakerBe aware of upcoming electionsBuilt a relationship with the assistants of politicians Following the great interest in last year's workshop, this workshop will complement the outcomes of the 'lessons learned' with additional tips for convincing a policymaker. The list of lessons learned will be expended by reflecting on models of knowledge translation. Models of knowledge translation and evidence informed policymaking are abundant. Some key aspects that can be added to the list are: considering the 'policy window', making the comparison with the policy plans, identifying the relevant stakeholders and groups affected by the problem. In this skills-building workshop, we will select a number of abstracts that have been accepted by the International Scientific Committee as posters and we will invite the presenting authors to this dare: Present your work and key messages in less than 2 minutes. In order to see whether the policymaker is convinced, we are organising a small panel of policymakers and ask them to give their feedback. Are they interested? Do they remember the key message? And if all goes well, do you get an invitation to come back and present more of your work? Key messages Being able to present your key messages anywhere, anytime is needed. Telling the public health narrative and telling a story are important skills for public health professionals to have.

Éditorial / Editorial

Special Issue Editorial: 7th In Sickness & In Health International Research Conference: Technologies, Bodies & Health Care F rom 7-9 June 2018 we gathered on the Rozelle Campus of the University of Tasmania, inSydney, Australia to extend the tradition of the In Sickness and In Health Conferences. These conferences were born from like-minded individuals (Helsinki-7) who were interested in creating an international network of critical health scholars and scholarship in relation to power, practice and ethics in health care. At the 7th In Sickness and In Health: Technologies, Bodies and Health Care we came from around the world to engage in critical discussions regarding technology and its interface with the social and material body in health and illness. Nowadays, technologies have permeated and contributed to an ideology of effi ciency across the social, critical conversations are needed more than ever. With opportunities for critical discussions becoming increasingly rare and vitally important, I am very pleased to see us continue the conversation with an even wider audience through this special edition of Aporia – The Nursing Journal. Thank you to all authors who have contributed to this special edition of Aporia – The Nursing Journal. I also extend my gratitude to the Editor-in-Chief of Aporia – The Nursing Journal, Professor Dave Holmes, for the opportunity to continue engaging in critical conversations about the assemblages and relations between technologies, bodies and health. I hope that each and every one of you will fi nd the content of these papers thought provoking and inspiring. I look forward to continuing our conversations at the 8th conference 10-12 June, 2020: People, Origin and the End of the Universe, Lleida, Spain. https://isihconference.com/isih-2020/ Rochelle Einboden, RN, PhD Conference Chair In Sickness & In Health Conference

Greening the European Public Health conferences – The Green Club

EUPHA members prepared a discussion paper on EUPHA’s “health and environment awareness” in 2015, presented it to the EUPHA section council, and conducted a workshop at the European Public Health (EPH) conference in Vienna 2016. Following this initiative, the Association determined that greening the conferences is one of the objectives for the EPH Conference strategy for 2017-2020. A “Green club” was set up by the Executive director in 2017. For reducing the environmental impact of the conference, the following were some of the early objectives and actions (2016): Catering - Coffee and tea served in recycled cups; most lunch ingredients from regional and organic origin. Reduced printing - Switching to E-Posters, digital marketing and email communication. Paperless communication - Abstract submission, registration and invoicing became fully web-based; the Conference Programme and abstracts could henceforth be accessed online. The Conference Bag was made of recycled materials. With the EPH conferences in Stockholm 2017 and Ljubljana 2018, advised by the Green Club, the following initiatives were taken: Lunches and Conference Dinner no longer served beef; vegan and vegetarian menus were introduced. Reduced printing - By 2018, the option to have a hard copy of the list of delegates was no longer offered. The conference Foundation encouraged its suppliers to limit the environmental impact of their products and services. In Stockholm, all restaurants at the venue were licensed to use the Nordic Ecolabel. All delegates and participants were encouraged to travel CO2 neutral. For Ljubljana in 2018, the Green club consulted the WHO Europe publication “Planning Healthy and Sustainable Meetings” and considered initiatives that participants could do for compensating their environmental impact. For the 2019 conference, discussions are intended to involve a wider conference participation.