Browsing by Author Tran, Nhan
A Systematic Review of Reporting Tools Applicable to Sexual and Reproductive Health Programmes: Step 1 in Developing Programme Reporting Standards
Chandra-Mouli, Venkatraman; Tran, Nhan; Kågesten, Anna; Ali, Moazzam; Tunçalp, Ӧzge; Gülmezoglu, A Metin ( 2015-09-29 )
Complete and accurate reporting of programme preparation, implementation and evaluation processes in the field of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) is essential to understand the impact of SRH programmes, as well as to guide their replication and scale-up.To provide an overview of existing reporting tools and identify core items used in programme reporting with a focus on programme preparation, implementation and evaluation processes.A systematic review was completed for the period 2000-2014. Reporting guidelines, checklists and tools, irrespective of study design, applicable for reporting on programmes targeting SRH outcomes, were included. Two independent reviewers screened the title and abstract of all records. Full texts were assessed in duplicate, followed by data extraction on the focus, content area, year of publication, validation and description of reporting items. Data was synthesized using an iterative thematic approach, where items related to programme preparation, implementation and evaluation in each tool were extracted and aggregated into a consolidated list.Out of the 3,656 records screened for title and abstracts, full texts were retrieved for 182 articles, out of which 108 were excluded. Seventy-four full text articles corresponding to 45 reporting tools were retained for synthesis. The majority of tools were developed for reporting on intervention research (n = 15), randomized controlled trials (n = 8) and systematic reviews (n = 7). We identified a total of 50 reporting items, across three main domains and corresponding sub-domains: programme preparation (objective/focus, design, piloting); programme implementation (content, timing/duration/location, providers/staff, participants, delivery, implementation outcomes), and programme evaluation (process evaluation, implementation barriers/facilitators, outcome/impact evaluation).Over the past decade a wide range of tools have been developed to improve the reporting of health research. Development of Programme Reporting Standards (PRS) for SRH can fill a significant gap in existing reporting tools. This systematic review is the first step in the development of such standards. In the next steps, we will draft a preliminary version of the PRS based on the aggregate list of identified items, and finalize the tool using a consensus process among experts and user-testing.

Coverage and costs of childhood immunizations in Cameroon / Hugh R. Waters ... [et al.]
Waters, Hugh; Dougherty, Leanne; Tegang, Simon-Pierre; Tran, Nhan; Wiysonge, Charles Shey; Long, Kanya; Wolfe, Nathan D; Burke, Donald S ( 2004 )
Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches
Tran, Nhan; Young, Taryn; Becerril Montekio, Victor; Song, Kayla; Alcalde-Rabanal, Jacqueline; Langlois, Etienne V ( 2016-03-17 )
There is an increasing interest worldwide to ensure evidence-informed health policymaking as a means to improve health systems performance. There is a need to engage policymakers in collaborative approaches to generate and use knowledge in real world settings. To address this gap, we implemented two interventions based on iterative exchanges between researchers and policymakers/implementers. This article aims to reflect on the implementation and impact of these multi-site evidence-to-policy approaches implemented in low-resource settings.The first approach was implemented in Mexico and Nicaragua and focused on implementation research facilitated by communities of practice (CoP) among maternal health stakeholders. We conducted a process evaluation of the CoPs and assessed the professionals' abilities to acquire, analyse, adapt and apply research. The second approach, called the Policy BUilding Demand for evidence in Decision making through Interaction and Enhancing Skills (Policy BUDDIES), was implemented in South Africa and Cameroon. The intervention put forth a 'buddying' process to enhance demand and use of systematic reviews by sub-national policymakers. The Policy BUDDIES initiative was assessed using a mixed-methods realist evaluation design.In Mexico, the implementation research supported by CoPs triggered monitoring by local health organizations of the quality of maternal healthcare programs. Health programme personnel involved in CoPs in Mexico and Nicaragua reported improved capacities to identify and use evidence in solving implementation problems. In South Africa, Policy BUDDIES informed a policy framework for medication adherence for chronic diseases, including both HIV and non-communicable diseases. Policymakers engaged in the buddying process reported an enhanced recognition of the value of research, and greater demand for policy-relevant knowledge.The collaborative evidence-to-policy approaches underline the importance of iterations and continuity in the engagement of researchers and policymakers/programme managers, in order to account for swift evolutions in health policy planning and implementation. In developing and supporting evidence-to-policy interventions, due consideration should be given to fit-for-purpose approaches, as different needs in policymaking cycles require adapted processes and knowledge. Greater consideration should be provided to approaches embedding the use of research in real-world policymaking, better suited to the complex adaptive nature of health systems.
Health policy and systems research: building momentum and community
Tran, Nhan; Røttingen, John-Arne; Ghaffar, Abdul; Kieny, Marie-Paule ( 2014-12-01 )

Implementation research in health: a practical guide / edited by David Peters … [et al]
Peters, David; Tran, Nhan; Adam, Taghreed; Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; World Health Organization ( 2013 )
Reporting guidelines for implementation and operational research
Tran, Nhan; Ramsay, Andrew; Maher, Dermot; Ford, Nathan; Hales, Simon; Lesher-Trevino, Ana ( 2015-12-02 )
In public health, implementation research is done to improve access to interventions that have been shown to work but have not reached many of the people who could benefit from them. Researchers identify practical problems facing public health programmes and aim to find solutions that improve health outcomes. In operational research, routinely-collected programme data are used to uncover ways of delivering more effective, efficient and equitable health care. As implementation research can address many types of questions, many research designs may be appropriate. Existing reporting guidelines partially cover the methods used in implementation and operational research, so we ran a consultation through the World Health Organization (WHO), the Alliance for Health Policy & Systems Research (AHPSR) and the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) and developed guidelines to facilitate the funding, conduct, review and publishing of such studies. Our intention is to provide a practical reference for funders, researchers, policymakers, implementers, reviewers and editors working with implementation and operational research. This is an evolving field, so we plan to monitor the use of these guidelines and develop future versions as required.
