Comparing priority received by global health issues: a measurement framework applied to tuberculosis, malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever

Abstract

Introduction The relative priority received by issues in global health agendas is subjected to impressionistic claims in the absence of objective methods of assessment of priority. To build an approach for conducting structured assessments of comparative priority health issues receive, we expand the public arenas model (2021) and offer a framework for future assessments of health issue priority in global and national health agendas.Methods We aimed to develop a more comprehensive set of measures for conducting multiyear priority comparisons of health issues in six agenda-setting arenas by identifying possible measures and data sources, selecting indicators based on feasibility and comparability of measures and gathering the data on selected indicators. We applied these measures to four communicable diseases—tuberculosis (TB), malaria, diarrhoeal diseases and dengue fever—given their differing impressionistic claims of priority. Where possible, we analysed the annual and/or 5-year trends from 2000 through 2022.Results We observed that TB and malaria received the highest priority for most periods in the past two decades in most arenas. However, a stagnation in development funding for these two conditions over the last 8–10 years may have fuelled the neglect claims. Despite having a higher disease burden, diarrhoea has been slipping in global priority with reduced spending, fewer clinical trials and stagnating publications. Dengue remains a low-priority condition but has witnessed a sharp rise in attention from the pharmaceutical industry.Discussions We expanded the arenas model by including a transnational arena (international representation) and additional measurements for various arenas. This analysis presents an approach to enable comparative trend analysis of the markers of agenda status over a multiyear period. More such analyses can bring much-desired objectivity in understanding how attention to global or national health issues changes over time in different arenas, potentiating a more equitable allocation of resources.