The knowledge-practice gap in public health is widely known. The importance of using different types of evidence for the development of effective health promotion has also been emphasized. Nevertheless, in practice, intervention decisions are often based on perceived short-term opportunities, lacking the most effective approaches, thus limiting the impact of health promotion strategies. This article focuses on facilitators and barriers in the use of evidence in developing health enhancing physical activity policies. Data was collected in 2012 by interviewing 86 key stakeholders from six EU countries (FI, DK, UK, NL, IT, RO) using a common topic guide. Content analysis and concept mapping was used to construct a map of facilitators and barriers. Barriers and facilitators experienced by most stakeholders and policy context in each country are analysed. A lack of locally useful and concrete evidence, evidence on costs, and a lack of joint understanding were specific hindrances. Also users' characteristics and the role media play were identified as factors of influence. Attention for individual and social factors within the policy context might provide the key to enhance more sustainable evidence use. Developing and evaluating tailored approaches impacting on networking, personal relationships, collaboration and evidence coproduction is recommended.

Background In Qatar, as with other countries, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have been the leading cause of death. This study aims to describe the prevalence of four NCDs clusters (cardiovascular diseases (coronary heart disease, stroke and peripheral vascular disease), cancers, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM)) by age, gender and nationality (Qataris and non-Qataris) accessing publicly funded primary care services to inform healthcare planning and strategies. Methods Cross-sectional study design was used. Data for individuals aged ≥18 and who visited a publicly funded primary health centre in Qatar during 2017 were extracted from electronic medical records and analysed. Results The findings showed that approximately 16.2 % of the study population (N = 68 421) had one or more of the four NCDs. The prevalence of NCDs showed an increasing trend with increasing age. Highest increases in the prevalence of NCDs were seen in a relatively young age group (30–49 years). The prevalence of all NCDs except cancers was higher in men. Prevalence rates of CHD and cancers in the study were found to be similar in both Qataris and non-Qataris; however, COPD and T2DM rates were higher in Qataris compared with non-Qataris. T2DM accounted for the highest prevalence of any NCD among both Qataris (230/1000) and non-Qataris (183/1000). Conclusions Although not comprehensive and nationally representative, this study is suggestive of a higher prevalence of NCDs among a younger population, men and in Qatari, Western Asian, Southern Asian, Sub-Saharan Africans, South-Eastern Asians Northern African and Western European nationalities. Prevention, treatment and control of NCDs and their risk factors are a public health problem in Qatar, and resources need to be invested towards targeted interventions with a multisectoral approach.

Background: In Qatar, prevalence of metabolic components is significantly higher compared to other countries. It is therefore urgent to understand the prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) with the goal of identifying etiologic factors in Qatar. This study was undertaken to estimate the prevalence of MetS, by age, gender and nationality within primary care settings in Qatar. In addition, it determined the independent effects of risk factors on the prevalence of MetS. Methods: A cross-sectional study design was used. Data for individuals aged ≥18 and who visited a publicly funded primary health centre in Qatar during 2017 were extracted from electronic medical records and analysed. Results: The findings showed that the prevalence of individual MetS components ranged between 48.5–60.3%. Overall prevalence of MetS was 48.8% (N = 62,492) in the study population. Prevalence of MetS increased with age. 50.3% of the population within the 40–49 year age group had MetS. In this age band, individuals were 5.1 times more likely of having MetS compared to the 18–29 year age group. MetS was slightly more prevalent in men (56 .7%) compared to women (42.5%). However, men were 1.33 times more likely of having MetS compared to women. The prevalence of MetS ranged between 20.6 - 60% across nationalities. It was most prevalent in Southern Asians (60%), followed by Northern Africans (50.7%) and Western Asians (excluding Qatar) (46.8%). Prevalence of MetS in Qataris was 43%. Southern Asians, Northern African and Western Asians were 1.73, 1.38 and 1.17 more likely to have MetS compared to Qataris. Conclusions: The study provides essential epidemiological information required by decision makers. Although not nationally representative, this study is suggestive of a higher prevalence of MetS among a younger population, men and in Southern Asian, Northern African and Western Asian nationalities. Prevention, treatment and control of MetS is a public health problem in Qatar. More studies are needed to establish which public health interventions are likely to be effective in Qatar.

To support the deployment of serology assays for population screening during the COVID-19 pandemic, we compared the performance of three fully automated SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays: Mindray CL-900i^® (target: spike [S] and nucleocapsid [N]), BioMérieux VIDAS^®3 (target: receptor-binding domain [RBD]) and Diasorin LIAISON^®XL (target: S1 and S2 subunits). A total of 111 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR- positive samples collected at ≥ 21 days post symptom onset, and 127 pre-pandemic control samples were included. Diagnostic performance was assessed in correlation to RT-PCR and a surrogate virus-neutralizing test (sVNT). Moreover, cross-reactivity with other viral antibodies was investigated. Compared to RT-PCR, LIAISON^®XL showed the highest overall specificity (100%), followed by VIDAS^®3 (98.4%) and CL-900i^® (95.3%). The highest sensitivity was demonstrated by CL-900i^® (90.1%), followed by VIDAS^®3 (88.3%) and LIAISON^®XL (85.6%). The sensitivity of all assays was higher in symptomatic patients (91.1–98.2%) compared to asymptomatic patients (78.4–80.4%). In correlation to sVNT, all assays showed excellent sensitivities (92.2–96.1%). In addition, VIDAS^®3 demonstrated the best correlation (r = 0.75) with the sVNT. The present study provides insights on the performance of three fully automated assays, which could help diagnostic laboratories in the choice of a particular assay according to the intended use.

This cross-sectional study examines knowledge, attitudes, and practices surrounding breast cancer awareness and screening among women residents in Qatar. Females, >18 years old, registered with the Primary Health Care Corporation were invited to complete an Arabic or English online survey using a modified version of the Breast Cancer Awareness Module. Of the 9008 participants, 69% report awareness of breast cancer warning signs, but the results did not substantiate these claims. There remains a disconnect between participants’ perceived awareness of their ability to detect breast cancer and their actual recognition of individual signs and symptoms. Nearly half (45.4%) report rarely or never checking their breasts for abnormalities (44.6%). Breast self-examination (BSE) and Breast Cancer Screening (BCS) uptake is low and many are unaware of the starting age for invitation to Qatar’s BCS program. While only 18% of women report receiving an invitation, 94% attended, indicating that the BCS invitation is a remarkably effective means of improving screening uptake. Policymakers should capitalize on early recognition, which is possible in the youthful population. Broadening awareness campaigns and interventions targeting a broader audience including males, community and religious leaders and healthcare professionals may prove more effective in Arab communities.

Ensuring health policies are informed by evidence still remains a challenge despite efforts devoted to this aim. Several tools and approaches aimed at fostering evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) have been developed, yet there is a lack of availability of indicators specifically devoted to assess and support EIPM. The present study aims to overcome this by building a set of measurable indicators for EIPM intended to infer if and to what extent health-related policies are, or are expected to be, evidence-informed for the purposes of policy planning as well as formative and summative evaluations. The indicators for EIPM were developed and validated at international level by means of a two-round internet-based Delphi study conducted within the European project ‘REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity’ (REPOPA). A total of 82 researchers and policy-makers from the six European countries (Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, the United Kingdom) involved in the project and international organisations were asked to evaluate the relevance and feasibility of an initial set of 23 indicators developed by REPOPA researchers on the basis of literature and knowledge gathered from the previous phases of the project, and to propose new indicators. The first Delphi round led to the validation of 14 initial indicators and to the development of 8 additional indicators based on panellists’ suggestions; the second round led to the validation of a further 11 indicators, including 6 proposed by panellists, and to the rejection of 6 indicators. A total of 25 indicators were validated, covering EIPM issues related to human resources, documentation, participation and monitoring, and stressing different levels of knowledge exchange and involvement of researchers and other stakeholders in policy development and evaluation. The study overcame the lack of availability of indicators to assess if and to what extent policies are realised in an evidence-informed manner thanks to the active contribution of researchers and policy-makers. These indicators are intended to become a shared resource usable by policy-makers, researchers and other stakeholders, with a crucial impact on fostering the development of policies informed by evidence.