A life-course approach to health encompasses strategies across individuals’ lives that optimize their functional ability (taking into account the interdependence of individual, social, environmental, temporal and intergenerational factors), thereby enabling well-being and the realization of rights. The approach is a perfect fit with efforts to achieve universal health coverage and meet the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Properly applied, a life-course approach can increase the effectiveness of the former and help realize the vision of the latter, especially in ensuring health and well-being for all at all ages. Its implementation requires a shared understanding by individuals and societies of how health is shaped by multiple factors throughout life and across generations. Most studies have focused on noncommunicable disease and ageing populations in high-income countries and on epidemiological, theoretical and clinical issues. The aim of this article is to show how the life-course approach to health can be extended to all age groups, health topics and countries by building on a synthesis of existing scientific evidence, experience in different countries and advances in health strategies and programmes. A conceptual framework for the approach is presented along with implications for implementation in the areas of: (i) policy and investment; (ii) health services and systems; (iii) local, multisectoral and multistakeholder action; and (iv) measurement, monitoring and research. The SDGs provide a unique context for applying a holistic, multisectoral approach to achieving transformative outcomes for people, prosperity and the environment. A life-course approach can reinforce these efforts, particularly given its emphasis on rights and equity.

Despite the existence of low-cost and effective interventions for childhood pneumonia and diarrhoea, these conditions remain two of the leading killers of young children. Based on feedback from health professionals in countries with high child mortality, in 2009, WHO and Unicef began conceptualising an integrated approach for pneumonia and diarrhoea control. As part of this initiative, WHO and Unicef, with support from other partners, conducted a series of five workshops to facilitate the inclusion of coordinated actions for pneumonia and diarrhoea into the national health plans of 36 countries with high child mortality. This paper presents the findings from workshop and postworkshop follow-up activities and discusses the contribution of these findings to the development of the integrated Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Pneumonia and Diarrhoea, which outlines the necessary actions for elimination of preventable child deaths from pneumonia and diarrhoea by 2025. Though this goal is ambitious, it is attainable through concerted efforts. By applying the lessons learned thus far and continuing to build upon them, and by leveraging existing political will and momentum for child survival, national governments and their supporting partners can ensure that preventable child deaths from pneumonia and diarrhoea are eventually eliminated.

SummaryBackgroundMeasles is an important cause of death in children, despite the availability of safe and cost-saving measles-containing vaccines (MCVs). The first MCV dose (MCV1) is recommended at 9 months of age in countries with ongoing measles transmission, and at 12 months in countries with low risk of measles. To assess whether bringing forward the age of MCV1 is beneficial, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits and risks of MCV1 in infants younger than 9 months.MethodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Proquest, Global Health, the WHO library database, and the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing database, and consulted experts. We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, outbreak investigations, and cohort and case-control studies without restriction on publication dates, in which MCV1 was administered to infants younger than 9 months. We did the literature search on June 2, 2015, and updated it on Jan 14, 2019. We assessed: proportion of infants seroconverted, geometric mean antibody titre, avidity, cellular immunity, duration of immunity, vaccine efficacy, vaccine effectiveness, and safety. We used random-effects models to derive pooled estimates of the endpoints, where appropriate. We assessed methodological quality using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines.FindingsOur search identified 1156 studies, of which 1071 were screened for eligibility. 351 were eligible for full-text screening, and data from 56 studies that met all inclusion criteria were used for analysis. The proportion of infants who seroconverted increased from 50% (95% CI 29–71) for those vaccinated with MCV1 at 4 months of age to 85% (69–97) for those were vaccinated at 8 months. The pooled geometric mean titre ratio for infants aged 4–8 months vaccinated with MCV1 compared with infants vaccinated with MCV1 at age 9 months or older was 0·46 (95% CI 0·33–0·66; I2=99·9%, p<0·0001). Only one study reported on avidity and suggested that there was lower avidity and a shorter duration of immunity following MCV1 administration at 6 months of age than at 9 months of age (p=0·0016) or 12 months of age (p<0·001). No effect of age at MCV1 administration on cellular immunity was found. One study reported that vaccine efficacy against laboratory-confirmed measles virus infection was 94% (95% CI 74–98) in infants vaccinated with MCV1 at 4·5 months of age. The pooled vaccine effectiveness of MCV1 in infants younger than 9 months against measles was 58% (95% CI 9–80; I2=84·9%, p<0·0001). The pooled vaccine effectiveness estimate from within-study comparisons of infants younger than 9 months vaccinated with MCV1 were 51% (95% CI −44 to 83; I2=92·3%, p<0·0001), and for those aged 9 months and older at vaccination it was 83% (76–88; I2=93·8%, p<0·0001). No differences in the risk of adverse events after MCV1 administration were found between infants younger than 9 months and those aged 9 months of older. Ov...

The results of 2 large field studies on the impact of the polio eradication initiative on health systems and 3 supplementary reports were presented at a December 1999 meeting convened by the World Health Organization. All of these studies concluded that positive synergies exist between polio eradication and health systems but that these synergies have not been vigorously exploited. The eradication of polio has probably improved health systems worldwide by broadening distribution of vitamin A supplements, improving cooperation among enterovirus laboratories, and facilitating linkages between health workers and their communities. The results of these studies also show that eliminating polio did not cause a diminution of funding for immunization against other illnesses. Relatively little is known about the opportunity costs of polio eradication. Improved planning in disease eradication initiatives can minimize disruptions in the delivery of other services. Future initiatives should include indicators and baseline data for monitoring effects on health systems development.