Abstract

Background: Despite increased recognition of the need for sexual and reproductive health and rights in humanitarian settings, evidence focusing on mainstreaming reproductive health services such as maternal, neonatal mortality, human immunodeficiency virus transmission and unsafe abortion still remains inadequate. The ability to understand the magnitude of the needs and highlight existing gaps is supported by improved data which is critical to informing effective policies, programming and funding decisions. The purpose of this report is to present the results of a research prioritization exercise on sexual and reproductive health and rights services in humanitarian settings for the WHO Africa region for the next three years. Methods: We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method in three phases. Experts from the region participated in an online survey to identify key areas for research in sexual and reproductive health and rights. To identify potential areas for research, the experts ensured answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, equity and potential impact of the questions. The research areas they identified were reviewed by World Health Organization technical team from headquarters. In a meeting of 67 participants, the questions were subjected to further review and analysis. Using a modified for scoring criteria, the questions were scored and ranked to provide the top ten priority questions to address sexual and reproductive health and rights services in humanitarian settings. Results: A list of 21 priority research questions on sexual and reproductive health and rights services in humanitarian settings were scored and ranked. Top ten priorities research questions were identified. Those that scored highly by scoring 30 points out of the possible maximum of 30 include: “determining the prevalence and associated factors of unwanted pregnancies and abortions performed in emergency and humanitarian settings”, “evidence on gender-based violence in humanitarian situations and its associated factors” and “defining an optimal model for coordinating sexual and reproductive health and rights interventions and responses in crisis situations”. Conclusions: Top ten research priorities in sexual and reproductive health and rights services in humanitarian settings were identified. The priority research areas have the potential to identify the best areas for programming of services in humanitarian settings. It is our hope that the identified research areas will be prioritized to support programming of services in humanitarian settings based on scientific evidence.

Highlights

  • Recent systematic reviews have highlighted a scarcity of rigorous evidence to inform interventions in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) services in humanitarian settings despite the fact that global conflicts are widespread and they continue to affect many lives [1]

  • The purpose of this report is to present the results of a research prioritization exercise on sexual and reproductive health and rights services in humanitarian settings for the World Health Organization (WHO) Africa region for the three years

  • These crises have long-term health eventualities on many people affected by such crises especially in low and middle-income countries (LMIC), yet the evidence base that informs THE response in humanitarian settings is weak [6]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Recent systematic reviews have highlighted a scarcity of rigorous evidence to inform interventions in SRHR services in humanitarian settings despite the fact that global conflicts are widespread and they continue to affect many lives [1]. For this reason, specific health problems in humanitarian settings whether caused by conflict, disease outbreak or disasters need relevant, require rigorous and up-to date evidence to guide appropriate responses. Preventable deaths from diseases with risks factors point towards SRHR [5] These crises have long-term health eventualities on many people affected by such crises especially in low and middle-income countries (LMIC), yet the evidence base that informs THE response in humanitarian settings is weak [6]. Using a modified for scoring criteria, the questions were scored and ranked to provide the top ten priority ques-

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call