Interventions to Maintain HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Service Delivery During Public Health Emergencies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Protocol for a Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although existing disease preparedness and response frameworks provide guidance about strengthening emergency response capacity, little attention is paid to health service continuity during emergency responses. During the 2014 Ebola outbreak, there were 11,325 reported deaths due to the Ebola virus and yet disruption in access to care caused more than 10,000 additional deaths due to measles, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Low- and middle-income countries account for the largest disease burden due to HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria and yet previous responses to health emergencies showed that HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria service delivery can be significantly disrupted. To date, there has not been a systematic synthesis of interventions implemented to maintain the delivery of these services during emergencies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to synthesize the interventions implemented to maintain HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria services during public health emergencies in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: The systematic review was registered in the international register for prospective systematic reviews. It will include activities undertaken to improve human health either through preventing the occurrence of HIV, tuberculosis, or malaria, reducing the severity among patients, or promoting the restoration of functioning lost as a result of experiencing HIV, tuberculosis, or malaria during health emergencies. These will include policy-level (eg, development of guidelines), health facility-level (eg, service rescheduling), and community-level interventions (eg, community drug distribution). Service delivery will be in terms of improving access, availability, use, and coverage. We will report on any interventions to maintain services along the care cascade for HIV, tuberculosis, or malaria. Peer-reviewed study databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and Global Index Medicus will be searched. Reference lists from global reports on HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, or malaria will also be searched. We will use the GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) approach to report on the quality of evidence in each paper. The information from the studies will be synthesized at the disease or condition level (HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria), implementation level (policy, health facility, and community), and outcomes (improving access, availability, use, or coverage). We will use the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist to report findings and discuss implications for strengthening preparedness and response, as well as strengthening health systems in low- and middle-income countries. RESULTS: The initial search for published literature was conducted between January 2023 and March 2023 and yielded 8119 studies. At the time of publication, synthesis and interpretation of results were being concluded. Final results will be published in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The findings will inform the development of national and global guidance to minimize disruption of services for patients with HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria during public health emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023408967; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=408967. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/64316.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.068 | 0.092 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".