BackgroundAddressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors’ shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility.AimThis study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded.ResultsOf 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently rep...

Patients with multiple sclerosis tend to report higher levels of work difficulties and negative outcomes, such as voluntary and involuntary work termination and reduced work participation. In this article, we discuss the complex interactions of disease, personal coping strategies, and social and structural factors that contribute to their work experiences and outcomes. An overview of the coping strategies and actions that leverage personal and context-level factors and dynamics is also provided to support the overall goal of continued work in patients with MS.

Michelle Remme and colleagues argue that if costs to users are considered and their financing is right, self care interventions for sexual and reproductive health can improve equity and efficiency

The legacy of male bias within pharmaceutical research, regulation, and commercialisation needs to be rectified, argue Sundari Ravindran and colleagues

Purpose – This exploratory study aims to explore the perceptions and experience of women doctors on working with each other and draw attention to their ‘voice’ on this issue. The equivocal and limited nature of relevant literature piqued our curiosity on how women perceive working with each other in work settings, particularly within the medical profession. Design/methodology/approach – Twelve women doctors within Australian public hospitals were interviewed through semi-structured informal interviews to “voice” their experiences and views on the comforts and discomforts of working with other women doctors. Their responses were compared to literature to determine similarities and uniqueness of their experiences to women in other settings. Findings – Insights from the respondent’s perceptions and experiences highlight several constructive and negative aspects of working alongside women doctors. Social and psychological constructs of being a “woman” and being a “woman doctor” as well as systemic/cultural issues of the medical fraternity formed how the women in this series of interviews perceived and related to the women doctors they worked with. Research limitations/implications – This exploratory provides initial insights into the experiences of women doctors on working with each other. Many themes identified have been explored in other settings. Hospital as a workplace, presents many similar work dynamics when considering the work interactions of women in other settings. This study should be used to drive more rigorous enquiry and a larger sample size. Practical implications – The working relationships women build with each other influence individual careers and organizational outcomes. Understanding the dynamics that improve and hinder the development of constructive work relationships between women can strengthen women-focused managerial and organizational policies and practices. Originality/value – The consolidation of literature coupled with the exploratory insights of this research contributes to a limited depth of existing literature not only in the medical profession, but in other industries and settings as well.