BACKGROUND: Equitable inclusion of low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) researchers and women in research authorship is a priority. A review of progress in addressing WHO-identified priorities provided an opportunity to examine the geographical and gender distribution of authorship in herpes simplex virus type-2 (HSV-2) research.
METHODS: Publications addressing five areas prioritised in a WHO workshop and published between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Data on author country, gender, authorship position and research funding source were collected by manuscript review and internet searches and analysed using IBM SPSS V.26.
RESULTS: Of, 297 eligible papers identified, (n=294) had multiple authors. Of these, 241 (82%) included at least one LMIC author and 143 (49%) and 122 (41%) had LMIC first and last authors, respectively. LMICs funded studies were more than twice as likely to include an LMIC first or last author as high-income country-funded studies (relative risk 2.36, 95% CI 1.93 to 2.89). Respectively, 129 (46%) and 106 (36%) studies had female first and last authors. LMIC first and last authorship varied widely by HSV-2 research area and increased over time to 65% and 59% by 2015-2020.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite location of the research itself in LMIC settings, over the 20-year period, LMIC researchers held only a minority of first and last authorship positions. While LMIC representation in these positions improved over time, important inequities remain in key research areas and for women. Addressing current and historical power disparities in global health research, research infrastructure and how it is funded may be key addressing to addressing these issues.

There is heightened awareness that a whole-of-systems approach to perpetrator responses is key to addressing domestic and family violence (DFV). This paper reports on the findings from a scoping review which mapped the international literature on how health professionals identify and respond to perpetrators of DFV within a hospital setting. A comprehensive scoping review methodology was used. The search, spanning January 2010 to January 2022, yielded 12,380 publications from four databases. Eligibility for inclusion included peer-reviewed literature with any reference to inpatient hospital health professionals identifying or responding to perpetrators of DFV. Fourteen articles were included in the final review. The review presents the literature categorized by levels of prevention, from primary, secondary, through to tertiary preventive interventions. An additional category \"other practices\" is added to capture practices which did not fit into existing levels. Despite glimpses into how health professionals can identify, and respond to perpetrators of DFV, the current knowledge base is sparse. The review did not identify any mandated or formal procedures for identifying and/screening or responding to perpetration of abuse in hospitals. Rather, responses to perpetrators are inconsistent and rely on the motivation, skill, and self-efficacy of health professionals rather than an embedded practice that is driven and informed by hospital policy or procedures. The literature paints a picture of missed opportunities for meaningful work with perpetrators of DFV in a hospital setting and highlights a disjuncture between policy and practice.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals, as complex organizations with clinical, financial, and social functions, face different barriers to providing high-quality and safe services at reasonable costs. Various initiatives have been carried out in hospital governance to improve quality, safety, and accountability. This research aims to identify the structures and dimensions that make hospital governance accountable.
METHODS: The research used Arksey and O\'Malley\'s scoping review framework to examine the research literature on hospital governance structure and accountability. The literature review included PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus ProQuest, Google search engine, and Google Scholar databases from 2010 to 2023. Data were analyzed using the content analysis method.
RESULTS: Excluding unrelated and duplicate sources, 40 articles and reports were included in the study. The studies were reviewed and analyzed based on organizational type, type of source, year of publication, objectives, and key findings. Accountable governance features were extracted from the selected articles and reports. The four main themes include inclusive governance, commitment to accountability, planning for accountability, and autonomous governance. Thirteen subthemes were extracted from the study literature.
CONCLUSIONS: Various initiatives have been implemented regarding the reform of the governance structure of public hospitals in different countries. Many of these reforms aim to improve financial and clinical accountability. The study results could be used to identify the structures and dimensions that make hospital governance accountable.

For better serving people\'s complex needs the subsequent movement to person-centred integrated care, requires inter-organisational cooperation and service provision by domain-overarching networks and alliances. In the development to these networks, it is relevant to explore which accountability approaches are appropriate for local inter-organisational healthcare governance. Therefore, in a scoping review we studied the current state of knowledge and practice of accountability in healthcare in the Netherlands. We found that two of the included 41 studies show characteristics of accountability towards healthcare with characteristics of integration care components, such as integration of services with accompanying accountability arrangements and development of networked accountability. The first studies are found in the literature which report on accountability in integrated care. With this we add to the international discussion about accountability as an aspect of integrated care governance, by providing insight into the current state of art of accountability in Dutch healthcare.

Due to constraints on institutional capacity and financial resources, the road to universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices. To assist with these choices, scholars and policy makers have done extensive work on criteria to assess the substantive fairness of health financing policies: their impact on the distribution of rights, duties, benefits and burdens on the path towards UHC. However, less attention has been paid to the procedural fairness of health financing decisions. The Accountability for Reasonableness Framework (A4R), which is widely applied to assess procedural fairness, has primarily been used in priority-setting for purchasing decisions, with revenue mobilization and pooling receiving limited attention. Furthermore, the sufficiency of the A4R framework\'s four criteria (publicity, relevance, revisions and appeals, and enforcement) has been questioned. Moreover, research in political theory and public administration (including deliberative democracy), public finance, environmental management, psychology, and health financing has examined the key features of procedural fairness, but these insights have not been synthesized into a comprehensive set of criteria for fair decision-making processes in health financing. A systematic study of how these criteria have been applied in decision-making situations related to health financing and in other areas is also lacking. This paper addresses these gaps through a scoping review. It argues that the literature across many disciplines can be synthesized into 10 core criteria with common philosophical foundations. These go beyond A4R and encompass equality, impartiality, consistency over time, reason-giving, transparency, accuracy of information, participation, inclusiveness, revisability and enforcement. These criteria can be used to evaluate and guide decision-making processes for financing UHC across different country income levels and health financing arrangements. The review also presents examples of how these criteria have been applied to decisions in health financing and other sectors.

暂无摘要。

In this article, we propose a novel conceptualization of account-holding intensity - defined as both the frequency and diligence of account-holding - as an instrument for analysing the behaviour of account-holders in the accountability landscape of EU agencies. We examine the account-holding intensity of six major institutional EU account-holders through a complementary mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative survey data and qualitative interview data collected from directors and senior managers of EU agencies. Account-holding intensity is measured through the survey data, with the interview data providing detailed insight into why some account-holders are more/less active and/or diligent than others. The survey and interview data are furthermore triangulated with in-depth interviews with account-holders and unobtrusive indicators of account-holding intensity. This amounts to a comprehensive empirical review of the EU agencies\' institutional accountability relationships, which reveals how different account-holders are driven by different institutional logics that are associated with different account-holding intensities.

UNASSIGNED: The urgent need to acquire medical supplies amidst the COVID-19 pandemic has led to bypassing of controls that govern the global pharmaceutical supply chain, increasing the risk of corruption. Hence, promoting anti-corruption, transparency, and accountability (ACTA) in supply chain and procurement has never been more important. The adoption of digital tools, if designed and implemented appropriately, can reduce the risks of corruption.
UNASSIGNED: Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted an interdisciplinary systematic review of health/medicine, humanities/social sciences, engineering, and computer science literature, with the aims of identifying technologies used for pharmaceutical supply chain and procurement optimization and reviewing whether they address ACTA mechanisms to strengthen pharmaceutical governance. Our review identified four distinct categories of digital solutions: e-procurement and open contracting; track-and-trace technology; anti-counterfeiting technology; and blockchain technology.
UNASSIGNED: Findings demonstrate an increase in research of technologies to improve pharmaceutical supply chain and procurement functions; however, most technologies are not being leveraged to directly address ACTA or global health outcomes. Some blockchain and RFID technologies incorporated ACTA mechanisms and mentioned specific policy/governance frameworks, but more purposeful linkage is needed. Findings point to the need for targeted policy development and governance to activate these innovative technologies to improve global health .

Provider-centered accountability, defined as the anticipation of a social interaction between a patient and their provider, increases patients\' adherence to prescribed treatment. Digital adherence interventions based on accountability may be especially effective at promoting adherence. The current study aimed to assess whether publications on digital adherence interventions discuss accountability, include intervention components related to accountability, and measure feelings of patient accountability as an outcome.
PubMed was queried between January 2010 and March 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials incorporating digital adherence interventions. Full-text articles were assessed for participant demographics, interventions utilized, outcomes, and intervention effectiveness.
A total of 131 publications met inclusion criteria. Only four publications discussed accountability as a potential factor influencing patient adherence. Although 11% of publications included an intervention with direct accountability, only one did so by design. None of the included studies assessed feelings of accountability as an outcome.
While provider-centered accountability has the potential to boost the efficacy of digital adherence interventions, accountability is rarely incorporated in studies of such interventions.
Additional investigation into the influence of accountability on adherence interventions will allow for the development of these interventions as effective tools applicable to the full range of patients.

Interventions to elicit accountability capitalize on social behaviors to improve adherence but are distinct from reminders. However, little is known about the impact of accountability in reminder-based adherence interventions. Through a literature review, we aim to identify the frequency and effectiveness of accountability in reminder-based intervention studies.
PubMed and PsycArticles were searched for reminder-based adherence studies. Articles were categorized as reminder-only or reminder with accountability studies. Studies were characterized by outcome measures, and differences between control and intervention groups were compared for studies that used electronic monitoring devices.
165 studies met the inclusion criteria; 154 used reminders without accountability (93%). 79 of the 154 reminder-only studies (51%) improved adherence in intervention groups compared to controls. Eleven of the 165 studies (6.6%) included an accountability aspect. The intervention group had better adherence than controls in 10 out of the 11 reminder with accountability studies (91%).
Although distinct from reminders, accountability can be incorporated in reminder-based interventions. However, it is not commonly included in reminder-based interventions.
It is important to consider accountability\'s effects on encouraging patient medication adherence. The addition of accountability interventions may further boost adherence, but few studies currently incorporate these types of interventions.