IntroductionIn the year 2000, a set of eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were presented as a way to channel global efforts into the reduction of poverty and the promotion of social development. A global discussion regarding how to renew these goals is underway and it is in this context that the Goals and Governance for Global Health (Go4Health) research consortium conducted consultations with marginalized communities in Asia, Latin America, the Pacific and Africa as a way to include their voices in world’s new development agenda. The goal of this paper is to present the findings of the consultations carried out in Uganda with two groups within low-resource settings: older people and people living with disabilities.MethodsThis qualitative study used focus group discussions and key informant interviews with older people in Uganda’s Kamwenge district, and with persons with disabilities from the Gulu region. Thematic analysis was performed and emerging categories and themes identified and presented in the findings.FindingsOur findings show that a sense of community marginalization is present within both older persons and persons living with disabilities. These groups report experiencing political sidelining, discrimination and inequitable access to health services. This is seen as the key reason for their poor health. Clinical services were found to be of low quality with little or no access to facilities, trained personnel, and drugs and there are no rehabilitative or mental health services available.ConclusionUganda must fulfil its international obligations and take progressive measures to meet the right to health for all its peoples, but especially allocate its limited resources to proactively support its most marginalized citizens. The growing impetus within post-2015 development negotiations to redress in-country health and other inequalities through a comprehensive systems approach is of importance in the Ugandan development context. This approach reflects the participant’s perspectives, which also calls for a more equitable approach to health and development as opposed to a narrow, vertical focus on specific population groups, as was the case with the MDGs.

Consensus was reached on how to design and conduct inclusive health research. However, this statement should be continuously adapted to incorporate recent knowledge. The focus of this consensus statement is largely on inclusive health research, but the principles can also be applied to other areas.

A more extensive and adequate evidence base relating to the health of this overlooked population group is needed. A useful first step would be for researchers specialising in intellectual disability to identify how we can best assist mainstream researchers to include and identify people with intellectual disability in their population-level studies.

PA interventions have the potential to improve the health and wellbeing of people with intellectual disability, a vulnerable group who require attention from public health practitioners and researchers. Given the health inequities that exist, public health researchers should target efforts to improve PA levels among this group.

To better understand how physical activity programs may contribute to improved health and social-support outcomes for people with intellectual disability, the authors conducted semistructured interviews with 11 people with intellectual disability and community-based volunteers in Brisbane, Australia. Three broad themes emerged: individual factors that generally facilitated activity, external factors that posed barriers to participation, and broader normative factors that directed participation. A key reflection arising out of the thematic analysis was that participants with intellectual disability and volunteers highlighted subtle but pervasive differences in barriers and facilitators to being active. Recommendations are provided for interventions aiming to improve physical activity and social support among those with intellectual disability. The authors' research process demonstrates the utility of seeking the views of potential participants before program rollout to inform implementation and demonstrates the usefulness of a qualitative, actively inclusive approach to health interventions.

BackgroundClinical practice guidelines provide an evidence-based approach to managing single chronic conditions, but their applicability to multiple conditions has been actively debated. Incorporating patient-preference recommendations and involving consumers in guideline development may enhance their applicability, but further understanding is needed.ObjectivesTo assess guidelines that include recommendations for comorbid conditions to determine the extent to which they incorporate patient-preference recommendations; use consumer-engagement processes during development, and, if so, whether these processes produce more patient-preference recommendations; and meet standard quality criteria, particularly in relation to stakeholder involvement.DesignA review of Australian guidelines published from 2006 to 2014 that incorporated recommendations for managing comorbid conditions in primary care. Document analysis of guidelines examined the presence of patient-preference recommendations and the consumer-engagement processes used. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation instrument was used to assess guideline quality.ResultsThirteen guidelines were reviewed. Twelve included at least one core patient-preference recommendation. Ten used consumer-engagement processes, including participation in development groups (seven guidelines) and reviewing drafts (ten guidelines). More extensive consumer engagement was generally linked to greater incorporation of patient-preference recommendations. Overall quality of guidelines was mixed, particularly in relation to stakeholder involvement.ConclusionsGuidelines do incorporate some patient-preference recommendations, but more explicit acknowledgement is required. Consumer-engagement processes used during guideline development have the potential to assist in identifying patient preferences, but further research is needed. Clarification of the consumer role and investment in consumer training may strengthen these processes.

No abstract

No abstract