{"title":"Factors influencing non-communicable disease policy process in Sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.","authors":"Enny Brouns, Chanelle Mulopo, Solange Mianda, Joy Mauti, Shannon McMahon, Connie Hoe, Bey-Marrie Schmidt","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2024-001409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong></p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have been the leading global cause of death for two decades, with a disproportionate impact on low- and middle-income countries. Despite the development of technical packages such as the WHO Best Buys, the adoption and implementation of NCD policies pose significant challenges. This scoping review explores the factors influencing the NCD policy process, including agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation and evaluation stages.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review followed the methodological framework provided by Levac <i>et al</i>. To identify relevant studies for the scoping review, we searched the literature in the following databases: Web of Science and Scopus using PubMed. Reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, and extracted data from the included studies. The results were collected using Excel and synthesised using descriptive numerical and thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 7538 records, after screening for title, abstract and full text, 35 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Six different types of policy actors were identified, namely, (i) government, (ii) private sector, (iii) advocates, (iv) experts, (v) international partners, (vi) experts and (vii) general public. Policy actors used lobbying tactics to influence how the policy process was executed; however, it was unclear how the process of influence took place. We identified six barriers of the NCD policy process: (i) limited access to resources, (ii) limited reliable local data, (iii) role of the government, (iv) limited multisectoral collaboration, (v) limited infrastructure, (vi) knowledge and belief. Six facilitators of the NCD policy process were identified: (i) multisectoral approach, (ii) sufficient capacity and financial resources, (iii) access to reliable local evidence, (iv) strong advocacy, (v) existing infrastructures, and (vi) political will were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings from this review revealed a knowledge gap in understanding of the tactics used by actors to influence the policy process and the absence of evidence related to the evaluation of NCD policies in Sub-Saharan Africa.</p>","PeriodicalId":101362,"journal":{"name":"BMJ public health","volume":"3 2","pages":"e001409"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12352196/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2024-001409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract:
Introduction: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have been the leading global cause of death for two decades, with a disproportionate impact on low- and middle-income countries. Despite the development of technical packages such as the WHO Best Buys, the adoption and implementation of NCD policies pose significant challenges. This scoping review explores the factors influencing the NCD policy process, including agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation and evaluation stages.
Methods: This scoping review followed the methodological framework provided by Levac et al. To identify relevant studies for the scoping review, we searched the literature in the following databases: Web of Science and Scopus using PubMed. Reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts, and extracted data from the included studies. The results were collected using Excel and synthesised using descriptive numerical and thematic analysis.
Results: The search yielded 7538 records, after screening for title, abstract and full text, 35 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Six different types of policy actors were identified, namely, (i) government, (ii) private sector, (iii) advocates, (iv) experts, (v) international partners, (vi) experts and (vii) general public. Policy actors used lobbying tactics to influence how the policy process was executed; however, it was unclear how the process of influence took place. We identified six barriers of the NCD policy process: (i) limited access to resources, (ii) limited reliable local data, (iii) role of the government, (iv) limited multisectoral collaboration, (v) limited infrastructure, (vi) knowledge and belief. Six facilitators of the NCD policy process were identified: (i) multisectoral approach, (ii) sufficient capacity and financial resources, (iii) access to reliable local evidence, (iv) strong advocacy, (v) existing infrastructures, and (vi) political will were reported.
Conclusion: Findings from this review revealed a knowledge gap in understanding of the tactics used by actors to influence the policy process and the absence of evidence related to the evaluation of NCD policies in Sub-Saharan Africa.
摘要:二十年来,非传染性疾病(NCDs)一直是全球主要的死亡原因,对低收入和中等收入国家的影响尤为严重。尽管制定了诸如世卫组织“最划算”等一揽子技术方案,但非传染性疾病政策的通过和实施构成了重大挑战。这一范围审查探讨了影响非传染性疾病政策进程的因素,包括议程制定、制定、通过、实施和评价阶段。方法:本综述遵循Levac等人提供的方法学框架。为了确定范围评价的相关研究,我们在以下数据库中检索文献:Web of Science和使用PubMed的Scopus。审稿人独立筛选标题、摘要和全文,并从纳入的研究中提取数据。使用Excel收集结果,并使用描述性数值和专题分析进行综合。结果:共检索到7538篇文献,经标题、摘要和全文筛选,有35篇文献符合本综述的纳入标准。确定了六种不同类型的政策行为者,即:(i)政府,(ii)私营部门,(iii)倡导者,(iv)专家,(v)国际合作伙伴,(vi)专家和(vii)公众。政策行为者使用游说策略来影响政策过程的执行;然而,目前尚不清楚这种影响是如何发生的。我们确定了非传染性疾病政策过程中的六个障碍:(i)有限的资源获取,(ii)有限的可靠本地数据,(iii)政府的作用,(iv)有限的多部门合作,(v)有限的基础设施,(vi)知识和信念。确定了非传染性疾病政策进程的六个促进因素:(i)多部门方法,(ii)充足的能力和财政资源,(iii)获得可靠的当地证据,(iv)强有力的宣传,(v)现有基础设施,以及(vi)报告了政治意愿。结论:本次审查的结果表明,在理解行为体影响政策进程所使用的策略方面存在知识差距,而且缺乏与评价撒哈拉以南非洲非传染性疾病政策有关的证据。