Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis

Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Nicola Low [verfasserIn] Sarah J Hawkes [verfasserIn] Dadong Wu [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2024

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: BMJ Global Health - BMJ Publishing Group, 2018, 9(2024), 1
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:9 ; year:2024 ; number:1

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ095010203

Internformat


LEADER	01000naa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ095010203
003	DE-627
005	20240413084953.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	240413s2024 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ095010203
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a R5-920
050		0	\|a RC109-216
100	0		\|a Nicola Low \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
264		1	\|c 2024
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.
653		0	\|a Medicine (General)
653		0	\|a Infectious and parasitic diseases
700	0		\|a Sarah J Hawkes \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Dadong Wu \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t BMJ Global Health \|d BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 \|g 9(2024), 1 \|w (DE-627)85645365X \|w (DE-600)2851843-3 \|x 20597908 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:9 \|g year:2024 \|g number:1
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 9 \|j 2024 \|e 1

Indexfelder

author_variant	n l nl s j h sjh d w dw
matchkey_str	article:20597908:2024----::nesadnteatrafciglbloiiapirtfrotolnsxaltasitdne
hierarchy_sort_str	2024
callnumber-subject-code	R
publishDate	2024
allfields	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 doi (DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 RC109-216 Nicola Low verfasserin aut Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases Sarah J Hawkes verfasserin aut Dadong Wu verfasserin aut In BMJ Global Health BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 9(2024), 1 (DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3 20597908 nnns volume:9 year:2024 number:1 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c kostenfrei https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2024 1
spelling	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 doi (DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 RC109-216 Nicola Low verfasserin aut Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases Sarah J Hawkes verfasserin aut Dadong Wu verfasserin aut In BMJ Global Health BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 9(2024), 1 (DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3 20597908 nnns volume:9 year:2024 number:1 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c kostenfrei https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2024 1
allfields_unstemmed	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 doi (DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 RC109-216 Nicola Low verfasserin aut Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases Sarah J Hawkes verfasserin aut Dadong Wu verfasserin aut In BMJ Global Health BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 9(2024), 1 (DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3 20597908 nnns volume:9 year:2024 number:1 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c kostenfrei https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2024 1
allfieldsGer	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 doi (DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 RC109-216 Nicola Low verfasserin aut Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases Sarah J Hawkes verfasserin aut Dadong Wu verfasserin aut In BMJ Global Health BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 9(2024), 1 (DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3 20597908 nnns volume:9 year:2024 number:1 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c kostenfrei https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2024 1
allfieldsSound	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 doi (DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 RC109-216 Nicola Low verfasserin aut Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential. Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases Sarah J Hawkes verfasserin aut Dadong Wu verfasserin aut In BMJ Global Health BMJ Publishing Group, 2018 9(2024), 1 (DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3 20597908 nnns volume:9 year:2024 number:1 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c kostenfrei https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2024 1
language	English
source	In BMJ Global Health 9(2024), 1 volume:9 year:2024 number:1
sourceStr	In BMJ Global Health 9(2024), 1 volume:9 year:2024 number:1
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Medicine (General) Infectious and parasitic diseases
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMJ Global Health
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Nicola Low @@aut@@ Sarah J Hawkes @@aut@@ Dadong Wu @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2024-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	85645365X
id	DOAJ095010203
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ095010203</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413084953.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240413s2024 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ095010203</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R5-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC109-216</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nicola Low</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infectious and parasitic diseases</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sarah J Hawkes</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dadong Wu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMJ Global Health</subfield><subfield code="d">BMJ Publishing Group, 2018</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2024), 1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)85645365X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2851843-3</subfield><subfield code="x">20597908</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Nicola Low
spellingShingle	Nicola Low misc R5-920 misc RC109-216 misc Medicine (General) misc Infectious and parasitic diseases Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
authorStr	Nicola Low
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)85645365X
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	R5-920
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	20597908
topic_title	R5-920 RC109-216 Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
topic	misc R5-920 misc RC109-216 misc Medicine (General) misc Infectious and parasitic diseases
topic_unstemmed	misc R5-920 misc RC109-216 misc Medicine (General) misc Infectious and parasitic diseases
topic_browse	misc R5-920 misc RC109-216 misc Medicine (General) misc Infectious and parasitic diseases
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMJ Global Health
hierarchy_parent_id	85645365X
hierarchy_top_title	BMJ Global Health
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)85645365X (DE-600)2851843-3
title	Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ095010203 (DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c
title_full	Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
author_sort	Nicola Low
journal	BMJ Global Health
journalStr	BMJ Global Health
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2024
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Nicola Low Sarah J Hawkes Dadong Wu
container_volume	9
class	R5-920 RC109-216
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Nicola Low
doi_str_mv	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
callnumber	R5-920
title_auth	Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
abstract	Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.
abstractGer	Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.
abstract_unstemmed	Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis
url	https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237 https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908
remote_bool	true
author2	Sarah J Hawkes Dadong Wu
author2Str	Sarah J Hawkes Dadong Wu
ppnlink	85645365X
callnumber-subject	R - General Medicine
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237
callnumber-a	R5-920
up_date	2024-07-04T01:27:23.543Z
_version_	1803609905346641921
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ095010203</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413084953.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240413s2024 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ095010203</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R5-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC109-216</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nicola Low</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Introduction Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a significant public health challenge, but there is a perceived lack of political priority in addressing STIs as a global health issue. Our study aimed to understand the determinants of global political priority for STIs since the 1980s and to discern implications for future prioritisation.Methods Through semistructured interviews from July 2021 to February 2022, we engaged 20 key stakeholders (8 women, 12 men) from academia, United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations, philanthropic organisations and national public health agencies. A published policy framework was employed for thematic analysis, and findings triangulated with relevant literature and policy documents. We examined issue characteristics, prevailing ideas, actor power dynamics and political contexts.Results A contrast in perspectives before and after the year 2000 emerged. STI control was high on the global health agenda during the late 1980s and 1990s, as a means to control HIV. A strong policy community agreed on evidence about the high burden of STIs and that STI management could reduce the incidence of HIV. The level of importance decreased when further research evidence did not find an impact of STI control interventions on HIV incidence. Since 2000, cohesion in the STI community has decreased. New framing for broad STI control has not emerged. Interventions that have been funded, such as human papillomavirus vaccination and congenital syphilis elimination have been framed as cancer control or improving newborn survival, rather than as STI control.Conclusion Globally, the perceived decline in STI control priority might stem from discrepancies between investment choices and experts’ views on STI priorities. Addressing STIs requires understanding the intertwined nature of politics and empirical evidence in resource allocation. The ascent of universal health coverage presents an opportunity for integrated STI strategies but high-quality care, sustainable funding and strategic coordination are essential.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infectious and parasitic diseases</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sarah J Hawkes</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dadong Wu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMJ Global Health</subfield><subfield code="d">BMJ Publishing Group, 2018</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2024), 1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)85645365X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2851843-3</subfield><subfield code="x">20597908</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014237</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/0e52ba1a47c64f72a279b104a597d10c</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://gh.bmj.com/content/9/1/e014237.full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2059-7908</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4023485

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Understanding the factors affecting global political priority for controlling sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative policy analysis

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?