TY - JOUR
T1 - Who has been caring for the baby?
AU - Darmstadt, Gary L.
AU - Kinney, Mary V.
AU - Chopra, Mickey
AU - Cousens, Simon
AU - Kak, Lily
AU - Paul, Vinod K.
AU - Martines, Jose
AU - Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.
AU - Lawn, Joy E.
N1 - Funding Information:
No specific funding was received for the work in this paper, but the Every Newborn Action Plan and the Every Newborn Lancet Series process and products are funded through a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the US Fund for UNICEF and from USAID; the epidemiological and official development assistance analyses were funded by a grant to the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine from the Children's Investment Fund Foundation and by a grant to the Aga Khan University from USAID. The time of JEL and MVK was funded by Saving Newborn Lives, Save the Children, through a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We thank John Grove for inputs towards the policy change assessment method, Sarah Henry for her assistance in development of timeline ( figure 3 ) and global architecture figures ( appendix ), and Hannah Blencowe and Marek Lalli for assistance with compiling of the data in the table and figure 5 . We acknowledge the work of Igor Rudan to compile data on newborn and stillbirth publications, and thank Marek Lalli for updating this analysis. We acknowledge the Countdown to 2015 economist team at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine for sharing previous official development assistance analyses, particularly Catherine Pitt and Justine Hsu, and we are especially grateful to Marek Lalli for the official development assistance analyses. We also thank Al Bartlett, David Oot, and the Saving Newborn Lives team at Save the Children, and the 150 policy and programme experts who were authors from the five countries on the Decade of Change for Newborn Survival analyses published in Health Policy and Planning, who informed our synthesis of learning on implementation. We acknowledge Kim Dickson and colleagues at UNICEF for provision of data on countries with national plans and mortality reduction targets. Jim Larson, Gabriel Sedman, and Joel Segre contributed to the figure on adoption of global health innovations ( appendix ). We are grateful to Jeremy Shiffman, Ann Starrs, and Bob Black for their reviews and critical insights, and to Hannah Blencowe, Mariam Claeson, Kate Kerber, Elizabeth Mason, and Lori McDougal for helpful critiques of the paper. Views expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of their employing organisations.
Funding Information:
Declaration of interests All authors have been actively involved in newborn survival issues for several years. GLD is employed at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, LK is employed by USAID, MC is employed by UNICEF, and JM was formerly employed by WHO. MVK is employed by Save the Children's Saving Newborn Lives programme, which is funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and JEL, ZAB, SC, and VP have received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through Save Newborn Lives and other sources.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Nearly a decade ago, The Lancet published the Neonatal Survival Series, with an ambitious call for integration of newborn care across the continuum of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health and nutrition (RMNCH). In this first of five papers in the Every Newborn Series, we consider what has changed during this decade, assessing progress on the basis of a systematic policy heuristic including agenda-setting, policy formulation and adoption, leadership and partnership, implementation, and evaluation of effect. Substantial progress has been made in agenda setting and policy formulation for newborn health, as witnessed by the shift from maternal and child health to maternal, newborn, and child health as a standard. However, investment and large-scale implementation have been disappointingly small, especially in view of the size of the burden and potential for rapid change and synergies throughout the RMNCH continuum. Moreover, stillbirths remain invisible on the global health agenda. Hence that progress in improvement of newborn survival and reduction of stillbirths lags behind that of maternal mortality and deaths for children aged 1-59 months is not surprising. Faster progress is possible, but with several requirements: clear communication of the interventions with the greatest effect and how to overcome bottlenecks for scale-up; national leadership, and technical capacity to integrate and implement these interventions; global coordination of partners, especially within countries, in provision of technical assistance and increased funding; increased domestic investment in newborn health, and access to specific commodities and equipment where needed; better data to monitor progress, with local data used for programme improvement; and accountability for results at all levels, including demand from communities and mortality targets in the post-2015 framework. Who will step up during the next decade to ensure decision making in countries leads to implementation of stillbirth and newborn health interventions within RMNCH programmes?.
AB - Nearly a decade ago, The Lancet published the Neonatal Survival Series, with an ambitious call for integration of newborn care across the continuum of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health and nutrition (RMNCH). In this first of five papers in the Every Newborn Series, we consider what has changed during this decade, assessing progress on the basis of a systematic policy heuristic including agenda-setting, policy formulation and adoption, leadership and partnership, implementation, and evaluation of effect. Substantial progress has been made in agenda setting and policy formulation for newborn health, as witnessed by the shift from maternal and child health to maternal, newborn, and child health as a standard. However, investment and large-scale implementation have been disappointingly small, especially in view of the size of the burden and potential for rapid change and synergies throughout the RMNCH continuum. Moreover, stillbirths remain invisible on the global health agenda. Hence that progress in improvement of newborn survival and reduction of stillbirths lags behind that of maternal mortality and deaths for children aged 1-59 months is not surprising. Faster progress is possible, but with several requirements: clear communication of the interventions with the greatest effect and how to overcome bottlenecks for scale-up; national leadership, and technical capacity to integrate and implement these interventions; global coordination of partners, especially within countries, in provision of technical assistance and increased funding; increased domestic investment in newborn health, and access to specific commodities and equipment where needed; better data to monitor progress, with local data used for programme improvement; and accountability for results at all levels, including demand from communities and mortality targets in the post-2015 framework. Who will step up during the next decade to ensure decision making in countries leads to implementation of stillbirth and newborn health interventions within RMNCH programmes?.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904178079&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60458-X
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60458-X
M3 - Review article
C2 - 24853603
AN - SCOPUS:84904178079
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 384
SP - 174
EP - 188
JO - The Lancet
JF - The Lancet
IS - 9938
ER -