BackgroundSeveral recent studies have attempted to measure the prevalence of disrespect and abuse (D&A) of women during childbirth in health facilities. Variations in reported prevalence may be associated with differences in study instruments and data collection methods. This systematic review and comparative analysis of methods aims to aggregate and present lessons learned from published studies that quantified the prevalence of Disrespect and Abuse (D&A) during childbirth.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Five papers met criteria and were included for analysis. We developed an analytical framework depicting the basic elements of epidemiological methodology in prevalence studies and a table of common types of systematic error associated with each of them. We performed a head-to-head comparison of study methods for all five papers. Using these tools, an independent reviewer provided an analysis of the potential for systematic error in the reported prevalence estimates.ResultsSampling techniques, eligibility criteria, categories of D&A selected for study, operational definitions of D&A, summary measures of D&A, and the mode, timing, and setting of data collection all varied in the five studies included in the review. These variations present opportunities for the introduction of biases – in particular selection, courtesy, and recall bias – and challenge the ability to draw comparisons across the studies’ results.ConclusionOur review underscores the need for caution in interpreting or comparing previously reported prevalence estimates of D&A during facility-based childbirth. The lack of standardized definitions, instruments, and study methods used to date in studies designed to quantify D&A in childbirth facilities introduced the potential for systematic error in reported prevalence estimates, and affected their generalizability and comparability. Chief among the lessons to emerge from comparing methods for measuring the prevalence of D&A is recognition of the tension between seeking prevalence measures that are reliable and generalizable, and attempting to avoid loss of validity in the context where the issue is being studied.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12978-017-0389-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Disrespect and abuse (D&A) experienced by women during facility-based childbirth has gained global recognition as a threat to eliminating preventable maternal mortality and morbidity. This study explored the frequency and associated factors of D&A in four rural health centres in Ethiopia. Experiences of women who delivered in these facilities were captured by direct observation of client-provider interaction (N = 193) and exit interview at time of discharge (N = 204). Incidence of D&A was observed in each facility, with failure to ask woman for preferred birth position most commonly observed [n = 162, 83.9%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 78.0–88.5%]. During exit interviews, 21.1% (n = 43, 95% CI 15.4–26.7%) of respondents reported at least one occurrence of D&A. Bivariate models using client characteristics and index birth experience showed that women’s reporting of D&A was significantly associated with childbirth complications [odds ratio (OR) = 7.98, 95% CI 3.70, 17.22], weekend delivery (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.05, 0.63) and no previous delivery at the facility (OR = 3.20, 95% CI 1.27, 8.05). Facility-level fixed-effect models found that experience of complications (OR = 15.51, 95% CI 4.38, 54.94) and weekend delivery (OR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01–0.32) remained significantly and most strongly associated with self-reported D&A. These data suggest that addressing D&A in health centres in Ethiopia will require a sustained effort to improve infrastructure, support the health workforce in rural settings, enforce professional standards and target interventions to improve women’s experiences as part of quality of care initiatives.

Background There is rich literature on barriers to medicines access for the treatment of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in high-income countries. Less is known about low- and middle-income countries, in particular the differences in coping with medicines access barrier by household wealth and disease. The aim of this study was to compare the coping mechanisms of patients with the lack of availability and affordability of cardio-vascular diseases, diabetes and asthma medicines in Kenya. Methods This qualitative study was part of a larger mixed methods evaluation study conducted in eight counties of Kenya from 2016 to 2019. Forty-nine patient interviews at study end line explored their NCD journey, perceptions of availability, stockouts and affordability of NCD medicines, their enrollment in health insurance, and their relationship with the private chemists. Transcribed interviews were coded using Nvivo software. A two-step thematic approach was used, first conducting a priority coding which was followed by coding emerging and divergent themes. Results Overall, we found that patients across all disease types and wealth level faced frequent medicine stock-outs at health facilities. In the absence of NCD medicines at health facilities, patients coped by purchasing medicines from local chemists, switching health facilities, requesting a different prescription, admitting oneself to an inpatient facility, establishing connections with local staff to receive notifications of medicine stock, stocking up on medicines, utilizing social capital to retrieve medicines from larger cities and obtaining funds from a network of friends and family. Categorizing by disease revealed patterns in coping choices that were based on the course of the disease, severity of the symptoms and the direct and indirect costs incurred as a result of stockouts of NCD medicines. Categorizing by wealth highlight differences in households’ capacity to cope with the unavailability and unaffordability of NCD medicines. Conclusions The type of coping strategies to access barriers differ by NCD and wealth group. Although Kenya has made important strides to address NCD medicines access challenges, prioritizing enrollment of low wealth households in county health insurance programs and ensuring continuous availability of essential NCD medicines at public health facilities close to the patient homes could improve access.

For public health to meet the challenges of COVID-19 and beyond, to increase evidence-based decision making, and to realize public health as a public good, we need a broad, intentional movement to build coalitions among public health experts in academia, research, practice, and the public sector. The authors discuss how failure to invest in public health systems, inadequate health communications, and poor public health practice during the COVID-19 pandemic opened the door for informal systems of information sharing and the consequences thereof. The lesson that public health professionals and public health associations need to draw from the COVID-19 pandemic is that communicating effectively is critical to ensuring that evidence, even emerging evidence, guides decision-makers. We discuss the challenges of evidence-based decision-making in public health policymaking and highlight examples of academic institutions that have invested in public health knowledge translation. Finally, we describe how the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) degree was designed to bridge communities of practice, and what is needed for those with DrPH training to stand up and meet the moment.