BackgroundThe existing gap between research evidence and public health practice has attributed to the unmet Millennium Development Goals in Africa and consequently, has stimulated the development of frameworks to enhance knowledge translation. These efforts aim at maximising health research utilisation in policy and practice to address the world’s disease burdens, including malaria. This study aimed at developing a contextual framework to improve the utilisation of malaria research for policy development in Malawi.MethodsThe study used two approaches including: two case studies of policy analysis exploring the policy-making process in Malawi, utilisation of local malaria research, and the role of key stakeholders in policy formulation process; and the assessment of facilitating factors and barriers to malaria research utilisation for policy-making in Malawi.ResultsFrom the case studies’ lessons and elements identified during the assessment of facilitating factors and barriers, a framework is developed to promote an integrated approach to knowledge translation. In this framework the Ministry of Health is considered as the main user of knowledge from research through the demand created by the research directorate and the National Malaria Control Programme. Key documents identified as being particularly relevant to the Ministry of Health for purposes of knowledge translation include the National Health Research Agenda, Guidelines for Policy Development and Analysis, and Guidelines for Evidence Use in Policy-making. Institutions conducting academic and policy-relevant malaria research in Malawi are identified and a consolidation of their linkages with the users of research is established through the Knowledge Translation Unit, the Evidence Informed decision-making Centre, and the African Institute for Development Policy. Equally, key players in this framework are the funding partners for both research and programmes that need to see accountability and impact of their support. Independent advisors, partners, and consultants also have their vital role in the process.ConclusionThe framework offers a practical basis for the factors identified and their linkages to promote a co-ordinated approach to malaria research utilisation in policy-making. Its applicability and success hinges on its wider dissemination and ownership by the government through the National Malaria Control Programme.

Objectives: Our objective was to examine the public response to public health and media messaging during the human monkeypox virus (MPXV) outbreak in the UK, focusing on at-risk communities. Methods: A co-produced, cross-sectional survey was administered in June and July 2022 using community social media channels and the Grindr dating app. Basic descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and odds ratio p values are presented.Results: Of 1932 survey respondents, 1750 identified as men, 88 as women, and 64 as gender non-conforming. Sexual identity was described as gay/lesbian/queer (80%), bisexual (12%), heterosexual (4%), and pansexual (2%); 39% were aged <40 years; 71% self-identified as White, 3% as Black, 8% as Asian, 2%as LatinX, and 11% as 'Mixed or Other' heritage groups. In total, 85% were employed and 79% had completed higher education. A total of 7% of respondents identified themselves as living with HIV. Overall, 34% reported limited understanding of public health information, 52% considered themselves at risk, 61% agreed that people with MPXV should isolate for 21 days, 49% reported they would first attend a sexual health clinic if symptomatic, 86% reported they would accept a vaccine, and 59% believed that MPXV originated from animals. The most trusted sources of information were healthcare professionals (37%), official health agencies (29%), and mainstream media (12%).Conclusions: Vaccine acceptability was very high, yet the understanding and acceptance of public health information varied. Social determinants of health inequalities already shaping the UK landscape risk were compounded in this new emergency. Engagement with structurally disadvantaged members of Paparini and Whitacre as joint first authors, and Nutland and Orkin as joint last authors.

Background:Research on various determinants of health is key in providing evidence for policy development, thereby leading to successful interventions. Utilization of research is an intricate process requiring an understanding of contextual factors. The study was conducted to assess enhancing factors and barriers of research utilization for malaria policy development in Malawi.Methods: Qualitative research approach was used through in-depth interviews with 39 key informants that included malaria researchers, policy makers, programme managers, and key stakeholders. Purposive sampling and snowballing techniques were used in identifying key informants. Interview transcripts were entered in QSR Nvivo 11 software for coding and analysis.Results: Respondents identified global efforts as key in advancing knowledge translation, while local political will has been conducive for research utilization. Other factors were availability of research, availability of diverse local researchers and stakeholders supporting knowledge translation. While barriers included: lack of platforms for researcher-public engagement, politics, researchers' lack of communication skills, lack of research collaborations, funder driven research, unknown World Health Organization policy position, and the lack of a malaria research repository. Conclusion:Overall, the study identified facilitating factors to malaria research utilization for policy development in Malawi. These factors need to be systematically coordinated to address the identified barriers and improve on malaria research utilization in policy development. Malaria research can be key in the implementation of evidence-based interventions to reduce the malaria burden and assist in the paradigm shift from malaria control to elimination in Malawi.

BackgroundMalaria research can play a vital role in addressing the malaria burden in Malawi. An organized approach in addressing malaria in Malawi started in 1984 by the establishment of the first National Malaria Control Programme and research was recognized to be significant. This study aimed to assess the type and amount of malaria research conducted in Malawi from 1984 to 2016 and its related source of funding.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in the Medline/PubMed database for Malawian publications and approved malaria studies from two Ethical Committees were examined. Bibliometric analysis was utilized to capture the affiliations of first and senior/last authors, funding acknowledgements, while titles, abstracts and accessed full text were examined for research type.ResultsA total of 483 publications and 165 approved studies were analysed. Clinical and basic research in the fields of malaria in pregnancy 105 (21.5%), severe malaria 97 (20.1%) and vector and/or agent dynamics 69 (14.3%) dominated in the publications while morbidity 33 (20%), severe malaria 28 (17%) and Health Policy and Systems Research 24 (14.5%) dominated in the approved studies. In the publications, 146 (30%) first authors and 100 (21%) senior authors, and 88 (53.3%) principal investigators in approved studies were affiliated to Malawian-based institutions. Most researchers were affiliated to the Malawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust, College of Medicine, Blantyre Malaria Project, Ministry of Health, and Malaria Alert Centre. The major malaria research funders were the National Institute for Health/USA, Wellcome Trust and the US Agency for International Development. Only three (2.5%) out of 118 journals publishing research on malaria in Malawi were from Africa and the Malaria Journal, with 76 (15.7%) publications, published most of the research from Malawi, followed by the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene with 57 (11.8%) in comparison to only 13 (2.7%) published in the local Malawi Medical Journal.ConclusionsClinical and basic research, which is mostly funded externally, in the fields of malaria in pregnancy, severe malaria and vector and/or agent dynamics dominated, while health policy and system research was least supported. The quantity may reflect scientific research activity but the initial primary impact is contribution to policy development.

Background Despite malaria prevention initiatives, malaria remains a major health problem in Malawi, especially for pregnant mothers and children under the age of five. To reduce the malaria burden, Malawi established its first National Malaria Control Programme in 1984. Implementation of evidence-based policies contributed to malaria prevalence dropping from 43% in 2010 to 22% in 2017. In this study, we explored challenges to implementing malaria policies in Malawi from the perspective of key stakeholders in the country. Methods In this qualitative study, we conducted in-depth interviews with 27 key informants from April to July 2015. We stopped sampling new participants when themes became saturated. Purposive and snowballing sampling techniques were used to identify key informants including malaria researchers that were policy advisors, policy makers, programme managers, and other key stakeholders. Interviews were conducted in English, recorded and transcribed, and imported into QSR Nvivo 11 for coding and analysis. Data were analysed using the qualitative content analysis approach. Results Participants identified three main categories of challenges to the implementation of malaria policies. First structural challenges include inadequate resources, unavailability of trained staff, poor supervision and mentorship of staff, and personnel turnover in government. The second challenge is unilateral implementation of policies. The third category is the inadequately informed policy development and includes lack of platforms to engage with communities, top-down approach in policy formulation and lack of understanding of socio-cultural factors affecting policy uptake by communities. Conclusions Policy makers should recognize that inadequate support of policy objectives leads to an implementation gap. Therefore, policy development and implementation should not be viewed as distinct, but rather as interactive processes shaping each other. Support for health policy and systems research should be mobilized to strengthen the health system. Detailed assessment of implementation challenges to specific malaria policies should also be conducted to address these challenges and support the shift from the paradigm of malaria prevention and control to elimination in Malawi.