Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories.

Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487" }, "headline": "Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories.", "datePublished": "2025-05-12T09:38:05", "dateModified": "2025-05-12T09:38:05", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Michael Give Chipeta" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Tabitha Nina Ngwira" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "McEwen Khundi" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Brewster Moyo" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Themba Mzembe" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Nyovani Janet Madise" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Simone Bösch" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Branwen J Hennig" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background Digital repositories and databases facilitate faster dissemination, transparency, and stakeholder collaboration. This review aimed to map and evaluate such digital infrastructures, focusing on their scope, content, functionality, adherence to FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reuse) principles, and user interface and experiences (UI/UX). Methods A review of global digital health policy repositories was conducted across multiple search engines and databases. The review targeted digital repositories that systematically collate health policy documents at a global level. Two country-specific repositories with a bearing on global health policies were also included. Results The study identified 59 global health policy repositories, with 15 matching our inclusion criteria evaluated in detail. These repositories contain vast amounts of data and are generally freely accessible, rendering them immensely rich sources for health policy documents, though with significant variability in content and coverage. The majority have a health focus, including HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH); about a third are more broad and emerging health threats are often neglected. Accessibility and usability are limited, with basic user interface features such as search and filtering tools are present for almost all repositories and a notable lack of advanced analytics or artificial intelligence capabilities. Furthermore, many repositories struggle to adhere to FAIR principles, reducing their utility and potential for integration. Sustainability is also a concern, as funding often relies on short-term projects or philanthropic support, undermining long-term viability. Conclusion These issues collectively hinder the ability of digital health policy repositories to support comprehensive and timely global health policy development. To unlock the full potential of existing or new repositories for health policy, identified challenges should be tackled systematically. We provide specific recommendations aimed at driving the development of equitable, inclusive, high-functioning repositories and strengthening evidence-driven global health policy systems. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487", "name": "Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing..." } } ] } Home Browse Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Somanje Mankhwala C, Chipeta MG, Ngwira TN et al. Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Systematic Review Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5712-4627 1 , Michael Give Chipeta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5882-9936 1 , Tabitha Nina Ngwira 1 , [...] McEwen Khundi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2718-7576 1 , Brewster Moyo 1 , Themba Mzembe 1 , Nyovani Janet Madise 2 , Simone Bösch 3 , Branwen J Hennig https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4127-8386 4,5 Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5712-4627 1 , Michael Give Chipeta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5882-9936 1 , [...] Tabitha Nina Ngwira 1 , McEwen Khundi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2718-7576 1 , Brewster Moyo 1 , Themba Mzembe 1 , Nyovani Janet Madise 2 , Simone Bösch 3 , Branwen J Hennig https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4127-8386 4,5 PUBLISHED 12 May 2025 Author details Author details 1 African Institute for Development Policy Malawi Office, Lilongwe, Central Region, Malawi 2 Independent Global Health Consultant, Southampton, UK 3 SICABO consulting, Zurich, Switzerland 4 Global Health Policy Lab, Virchow Foundation, Berlin, Germany 5 Global Health Policy Lab, Charité Centre for Global Health, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Michael Give Chipeta Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Writing – Review & Editing Tabitha Nina Ngwira Roles: Data Curation, Writing – Review & Editing McEwen Khundi Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Brewster Moyo Roles: Data Curation, Writing – Review & Editing Themba Mzembe Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Nyovani Janet Madise Roles: Funding Acquisition, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Simone Bösch Roles: Investigation, Writing – Review & Editing Branwen J Hennig Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the Research on Research, Policy & Culture gateway. Abstract Background Digital repositories and databases facilitate faster dissemination, transparency, and stakeholder collaboration. This review aimed to map and evaluate such digital infrastructures, focusing on their scope, content, functionality, adherence to FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reuse) principles, and user interface and experiences (UI/UX). Methods A review of global digital health policy repositories was conducted across multiple search engines and databases. The review targeted digital repositories that systematically collate health policy documents at a global level. Two country-specific repositories with a bearing on global health policies were also included. Results The study identified 59 global health policy repositories, with 15 matching our inclusion criteria evaluated in detail. These repositories contain vast amounts of data and are generally freely accessible, rendering them immensely rich sources for health policy documents, though with significant variability in content and coverage. The majority have a health focus, including HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH); about a third are more broad and emerging health threats are often neglected. Accessibility and usability are limited, with basic user interface features such as search and filtering tools are present for almost all repositories and a notable lack of advanced analytics or artificial intelligence capabilities. Furthermore, many repositories struggle to adhere to FAIR principles, reducing their utility and potential for integration. Sustainability is also a concern, as funding often relies on short-term projects or philanthropic support, undermining long-term viability. Conclusion These issues collectively hinder the ability of digital health policy repositories to support comprehensive and timely global health policy development. To unlock the full potential of existing or new repositories for health policy, identified challenges should be tackled systematically. We provide specific recommendations aimed at driving the development of equitable, inclusive, high-functioning repositories and strengthening evidence-driven global health policy systems. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Health policy documents, Repository, Databases, Global Health, User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX) Corresponding Author(s) Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: This work was supported by funding to the Global Health Policy Lab (GHPL) Initiative from the Novartis Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, and Novo Nordisk. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 Somanje Mankhwala C et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Somanje Mankhwala C, Chipeta MG, Ngwira TN et al. Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 ) First published: 12 May 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 ) Latest published: 12 May 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 ) Introduction The proliferation of technological advances has made data digitisation and digital infrastructures such as repositories, databases and other online platforms more accessible at local, national and international levels. This shift has enhanced efficiency in the availability of health policy information while diversifying sources of relevant information. Health policy information may include a policy, law, national health strategy, national control plan, action plan or guideline. Here, we refer to these collectively as “health policy documents”. Digitised health policy documents collated in such platforms can facilitate faster dissemination of information, ensuring that decision-makers and other stakeholders, including patients, researchers, advocates and anyone else interested in health policymaking, have timely access to relevant content regarding health. In addition, the widespread availability of these digital tools promotes greater transparency in the policy-making process, as stakeholders are better equipped to review, critique, and engage with health policy documents. At the same time, stakeholders can track the evolution of policies over time, ultimately supporting effective governance and policy implementation. This increased openness also fosters collaboration, transparency and trust among the various stakeholders involved in shaping public health policies. Our review identifies and maps these resources and evaluate their scope, content, and functionality in terms of user interface (UI) and user experience (UX), with the ultimate goal of evaluating how effectively they may be able to support health policy and systems development. We focused on digital infrastructures designed to systematically collate health policy documents. Our assessment aimed to determine how well such digital repositories for health policy may meet the needs of diverse health stakeholders, including decision-makers such as parliamentarians. Further, our evaluation identified strengths and limitations of these digital infrastructures in facilitating access to health policy documents in a manner that is up-to-date and comprehensive. This analysis seeks to increase our understanding of how such existing and future infrastructures can be optimised better to support evidence-based policymaking and decision-making in the health sector. Additionally, the findings provide a foundation for advocating for the development of a centralised repository for health policy documents. Methods We conducted an in-depth desk review of online databases, repositories, and other such platforms to explore resources that systematically collate what we refer to here as “health policy documents”. Surprisingly, most organisations and publications do not explicitly state their understanding of the policy terminology; we hence include definitions for the terms policy, law, national health strategy, national control plan, (health) action plan and (health) guideline, summarised in Table 1 of the glossary of key policy terms in health. Table 1. Glossary of key policy terms a applied in health. Term alternative terms Definition Policy b A policy is a formal statement that defines goals, priorities and parameters for action by government in response to a societal need. It defines a vision for the future which in turn helps to establish targets and points of reference for the short and medium term. It outlines priorities and the expected roles of different stakeholders, builds consensus, and informs people. 1 Law c Laws are rules that govern behaviour. Laws can be made by a legislature, resulting in primary legislation (often called statutes or acts), by executive or local government through the issue of secondary legislation (including decrees, regulations and by laws), or by judges through the making of binding legal precedent (normally in common law jurisdictions). 2 National Health Strategy , National Health Plan or National Health Strategic Plan A national health strategy provides a model of an intended future situation, and a programme of action predetermined to achieve the intended situation. It contains the broad, long-term lines of action to achieve the policy vision and goals for the health sector, incorporating the identification of suitable points for intervention, the ways of ensuring the involvement of other sectors, the range of political, social, cultural, economic, legal and technical factors, as well as constraints and ways of dealing with them. 3 National [Disease] Control Plan , National [Disease] Strategy / Strategic Plan / Programme A national control plan is a strategic plan to guide the control of a particular disease or health problem at national level, with the intended actions to achieve the goals of a given programme, ideally aligned to the national health strategy. 3 Action Plan An action plan is a strategic document that outlines specific steps taken by government agencies to implement a policy or address a societal issue at the local, regional or national level, typically identifying key stakeholders, tasks, timelines, resource allocation, and measures of success. Guideline , Protocol, Best Practice, Consensus Statement, Expert Committee Recommendation or Integrated Care Pathway Guidelines are systematically developed evidence-based formal advisory statements which assist providers, recipients and other stakeholders to make informed decisions about appropriate health interventions. Health interventions are defined broadly to include not only clinical procedures but also public health actions. 4 a Note that by our definition to be included, a policy, national health strategy, national control plan, action plan or guideline must be adopted or otherwise officially and publicly endorsed by the government (legislature or a government agency). Mere alignment with international guidance or best practice standards does not suffice. The glossary should be read with this understanding in mind. b Many policies are developed and adopted to expressly protect, promote or strengthen health, healthcare, or public health (referred to as health, healthcare, or public health policy). However, policies outside of health-related sectors impact health. Therefore, the GHLP uses a definition which does not restrict policy to health-specific policies but may include any policy impacting health, healthcare or public health (positively or negatively). c Many laws are adopted to expressly protect and promote health, commonly referred to as public health law. However, many non-health related laws influence health, for example by shaping and preserving social conditions, known in public health as “social determinants of health”. Consequently, the GHLP uses a definition which does not restrict law to public health law but may include any legal instrument impacting health (positively or negatively). Search strategy a) Identification of digital repositories and other infrastructures for health policy The study employed a comprehensive search strategy to identify digital repositories and other relevant infrastructure. This approach included generalised search engines such as Google , specialised search engines and targeted databases such as PubMed , Scopus , and JSTOR to ensure broader and more nuanced coverage of relevant resources. Additionally, artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT, 5 were utilised to uncover resources not readily accessible through conventional search methods. We further identified digital repositories and infrastructure by visiting directly the websites of relevant global and regional health organisations, academic repositories from leading public health universities, commercial databases, proprietary platforms, and resources from international health non-governmental organisations. This multifaceted approach ensured a thorough and diverse identification of resources necessary to support our landscape analysis and evaluation objectives. Electronic searches were conducted using keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) across the abovementioned platforms. The primary search terms included “health policies,” “health laws,” “health strategies,” “health guidelines,” “health action plans,” “digital repositories,” “digital infrastructure,” and “global health.” To ensure comprehensiveness, synonyms for each term were identified and integrated into a robust search strategy, detailed in Search terms . In addition to database searches, reference lists and associated links from identified repositories and infrastructures were screened to discover other potentially relevant sources. This iterative process ensured the inclusion of a diverse and comprehensive selection of repositories and infrastructures pertinent to health policy documents. b) Inclusion and exclusion criteria We included digital repositories that systematically collate health policy documents, as defined in Table 1 . The review encompassed only platforms where the content was either available in English or offered an English translation as one of their languages. Platforms functioning primarily as search engines, analytical databases, hubs for academic literature, or think pieces—rather than dedicated repositories for health policy documents—were excluded. Furthermore, repositories were dropped from the review if they lacked an accessible link, had broken or missing links, or required access through login or subscription to access any information, rendering them inaccessible to the public or our research team. However, repositories with partial or limited access requiring a subscription to access more information or information after a set period were reviewed. This carefully defined inclusion and exclusion process ensured a focused and targeted analysis of publicly accessible digital infrastructures systematically collating health policy documentation. It is important to note that a few repositories were identified after the data collection window had closed and were thus not included for that reason (listed in List of excluded repositories ). Data collection a) Screening of identified repositories We employed a two-step screening process to ensure rigorous verification of the repositories and digital infrastructure to be evaluated in detail ( PRISMA flow chart ). In the first step, two reviewers (TM and BM) independently screened all repositories identified through the electronic database searches. During this stage, the reviewers conducted a first assessment of all inclusion/exclusion criteria (see below) while eliminating duplicate records. This initial screening ensured a more focused and relevant set of repositories for further review. In the second step, two reviewers conducted an additional review of the above criteria to finalise the list of repositories to be taken forward for detailed evaluation. Any disagreements between the two reviewers were carefully examined and discussed. When consensus could not be reached, a third-party expert (MGC, MK, TN, or CSM) was consulted to resolve the discrepancies. This collaborative approach ensured a thorough process for including relevant repositories in the evaluation and a consistent and more objective assessment across the repositories. b) Data extraction and evaluation of the scope, content, and functionality of the repositories We developed a set of assessment and review criteria based on which data was extracted from the repositories for evaluation. These criteria were piloted on three repositories before the actual data extraction took place to enhance the consistency of the results. The set of evaluation criteria guided specific data extraction. We briefly employed a structured approach by extracting the following data, where possible. 1. Repository name – The official legal name of the repository. 2. Web link – The website URL for accessing the repository. 3. Type of organisation maintaining the repository – The key institutions or organisations responsible for maintaining the repository. 4. Access type – The level of access required, such as open access and free, partial or limited access requiring an account (free) or access for a limited period. 5. Geographical coverage – The scope of the repository’s coverage, such as global, regional, or country-specific. 6. Area of focus – The specific health area covered by the repository, such as NCDs, HIV, MNCH, etc. 7. Adherence to FAIR principles – Information on whether the repository follows the FAIR principles: findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability. 8. Data content – The data types captured in the repository, such as health policies, laws, strategies, and guidelines (i.e., health policy documents). 9. Data collection methodology – Information on the methods the repository uses to collect the data contained within. 10. Tools and site usability – Details about analytical and interactive tools provided on the platform to enhance user interfaces and experience, including functionalities like search, filters, and user guides. 11. Data visualisation – The data visualisation options that are available in the repository. 12. Funding – Information on the funding sources for the repository, as well as its sustainability model. The information extracted from each of the included repositories and digital infrastructures was collated in a Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States) database (for a condensed extract, see Summary of Digital Repositories of Health Policy included in our evaluation ). A list of repositories considered for evaluation but not included in the final list is also provided ( List of excluded repositories ). Data analysis and evaluation Eligible repositories were evaluated based on four key dimensions: the health policy focus area, data content, adherence to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) principles, and UI/UX features supporting content discovery. Where available, information on sustainability and funding models of the health policy document repositories was also assessed. 1. Health policy focus area We examined the scope and comprehensiveness of health policy documentation curated within these repositories. We analysed the range and specificity of health or disease areas covered in each repository and evaluated the format of health policy documents, focusing on their relevance to specific policy domains. 2. Data content The types of health policy documents housed in each repository were evaluated, as outlined in Table 1 . This assessment focused on the diversity and granularity of the data provided. 3. FAIR principles Repositories were assessed for compliance with FAIR principles, ensuring that data contained, i.e., health policy documents or meta-data, are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. This evaluation highlighted how well each repository enables effective data discovery, integration, and reuse. 4. User interface (UI) and User experience (UX) We were further interested in the design and functionality of each repository to assess its usability. UI refers to the visual components and layout of the platform, such as buttons, menus, and icons, designed to facilitate user interaction. Conversely, UX encompasses the overall user journey, including intuitiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. Specifically, we reviewed the availability of navigation tools, interactive elements, data access and download options, customisable views, and data presentation features, emphasising how these aspects enhance content discovery and user engagement. Naturally, user bias affects UX to some extent; therefore, our findings in this respect should be taken with this in mind. We adopted this comprehensive evaluation framework to identify both the strengths and opportunities concerning the design and functionality of such repositories. Many of them are set up to enhance the accessibility and practical utility of health policy documentation by diverse users, including parliamentarians, people with lived experiences, researchers, and others. Results Health policy repositories play a critical role in providing access to health policy documents, yet surprisingly, few repositories comprehensively collate such documents systematically at national or global levels. Through our investigation, we identified 59 repositories globally, of which 15 were selected for detailed evaluation, see PRISMA flow chart . Of the 15 selected, 13 repositories had global coverage, while two repositories provided national health policy-related information, see Supplementary. These repositories are established and maintained by various public and private organisations, including government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and academic institutions (see Summary of Digital Repositories of Health Policy included in our evaluation ; a list of all excluded repositories is provided in List of excluded repositories ). These repositories’ content (i.e., focus areas) and functionalities vary widely, reflecting differing organisational priorities and capacities. Similarly, adherence to FAIR principles and UI/UX was diverse across the 15 repositories we investigated in detail. Despite this heterogeneity, our landscape analysis uncovered several noteworthy patterns and insights, shedding light on health policy repositories’ current state and potential to support evidence-based decision-making and policy alignment across sectors. The identified and reviewed digital repositories and infrastructure came from diverse sources. These included global and regional health organisations, such as the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) Global Health Observatory (GHO), 6 the Lancet Global Health Hub, 7 and the Cochrane Library. 4 Academic repositories from leading public health universities, including Harvard DASH, 8 Georgetown University, 9 and the Health Systems Evidence platform maintained by McMaster University, 10 were also explored. Furthermore, we examined commercial databases like Policy Commons 11 and Overton, 12 proprietary platforms, and resources identified through international health non-governmental organisations, including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 13 the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS), 10 and the UN Digital Library. A key finding revealed that the majority (9 out of the 15) of repositories are funded through short-term projects or philanthropic contributions, raising concerns about their long-term sustainability and continued visibility. The reliance on external funding makes these repositories vulnerable to shifting donor priorities, often influenced by emerging global challenges such as pandemics like COVID-19 and other crises like conflicts. This lack of stable, predictable funding threatens the ability of these platforms to maintain regular updates, adapt to evolving needs, and ensure their relevance over time. 1. Health policy document focus areas and scope The reviewed repositories represent both focusing on key health areas and others more health area agnostic (see Table 2 ). Among the fifteen 15 repositories, HIV/AIDS is the most frequently addressed, with five 5 repositories covering topics such as travel restrictions and general laws and policies. NCDs follow, with four repositories on issues like NCD management, physical activity, nutrition and tobacco control. One repository was dedicated to maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH). The remaining five 5 repositories adopt a more general approach, offering broader insights into public health and various health areas. The repositories grouped under NCDs and MNCH also encompass a wide range of health conditions. Of the 15 repositories evaluated, 13 are fully open-access or require creating a free account, making them accessible to users worldwide. However, two 2 repositories have restricted access, requiring either vetted registration or payment, thereby resulting in partial user access to information or limited duration access. Most repositories provide global coverage of health policy documents, yet notable regional disparities exist. Data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are particularly scarce, highlighting a significant gap in equitable representation. 2. Data content The data content across repositories was diverse and inconsistently defined, if at all. It includes various types of health policy documents such as laws, policies, national health strategies, national health plans, national control plans, national disease/programme strategies, action plans, guidelines, protocols, best practices, consensus statements, expert committee recommendations, or integrated care pathways. For this reason, we provide definitions for each of the key policy terms, as shown in Table 1 . Definitions of these key policy terms were collated, adopted and, in some instances, slightly adapted from various WHO sources. Most repositories contained information on existing health policies and guidelines (see Summary of digital Repositories of Health Policy included in our evaluation for details on data content). Importantly, however, source data—i.e. health policy documents in PDF or other formats—is accessible in only 6 out of the 15 repositories. This limited accessibility reduces their utility for researchers, citizens, and policymakers while hindering data comparability across repositories. Table 2. Summary of Digital Repositories of Health Policy and their Adherence to FAIR Principles a (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability). Principle Indicator Number of repositories Findability F1. meta (data) are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier 3/15 F2. data are described with rich metadata 11/15 F3. metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the data it describes 4/15 F4. meta (data) are registered or indexed in a searchable resource 14/15 Accessibility A1. meta (data) are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communications protocol 8/15 A1.1 The protocol is open, free, and universally implementable 9/15 A1.2 the protocol allows for an authentication and authorization procedure, where necessary 4/15 A2. Metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available 4/15 Interoperability I1. Meta (data) use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation 13/15 I2. Meta (data) use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles 11/15 I3. Meta (data) include qualified references to other metadata 11/15 Reusability R1. Meta (data) are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes 13/15 R1.1 meta (data) are released with a clear and accessible data usage license 6/15 R1.2 meta (data) are associated with detailed provenance 14/15 R1.3 meta (data) meet domain-relevant community standards 10/15 a https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/ . Adherence to FAIR Principles Adherence to FAIR principles varied widely among the repositories. Many appeared to have been established without explicitly considering these principles, leading to significant gaps in the data’s findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (see Table 2 ). This inconsistency poses challenges for the broader health community, particularly for policymakers, researchers or others interested in health policy who may employ these repositories, generally set up to make health policy data widely available, as a basis for comparative analyses, to promote accountability and ultimately to inform national responses in each health area. The Findability guideline in the FAIR principles ensures that data (here, health policy documents) and/or metadata stored as digital assets can be easily located by both humans and machines. Metadata, also known as (meta) data, refers to data about data—in our case, data that provides information about health policy documents. This requires unique identifiers and well-structured, searchable metadata. Our assessment examined four indicators of findability (F1–F4, Table 2 ). Results show a range of performance: while only three repositories utilised unique identifiers, 14 repositories were indexed in searchable resources, significantly enhancing discoverability. The Accessibility guideline emphasises using standardised protocols for data retrieval and clear access conditions to guarantee data availability. This includes ensuring that metadata remains accessible even when the associated health policies are unavailable. Our evaluation found that four 4 repositories provided accessible metadata, while nine 9 implemented open, free, and universally applicable protocols, reflecting strong adherence to accessibility standards ( Table 2 ). The Interoperability guideline ensures that data can integrate seamlessly with other datasets and systems using standardised vocabularies and frameworks. We evaluated three indicators of interoperability (I1–I3, Table 2 ). The findings revealed that 13 out of 15 platforms used formal, accessible, and widely applicable metadata languages. Furthermore, 11 platforms adhered to FAIR vocabulary standards and included qualified references to other metadata, demonstrating high compatibility and integration ( Table 2 ). The Reusability guideline evaluates whether data is provided with clear usage licenses and comprehensive documentation, enabling users to effectively understand, reuse, and build upon it. As shown in Summary of Digital Repositories of Health Policy included in our evaluation , thirteen 13 repositories offered richly described metadata with relevant attributes, and fourteen 14 included metadata with detailed provenance information. However, only six repositories provided a clear and accessible data usage license, and ten 10 adhered to domain-relevant community standards. These findings underscore the need for improvements in licensing clarity to enhance data reusability. 3. User interface (UI) and User experience (UX) To evaluate the UI/UX features of the health policy repositories, we focused on the availability and functionality of navigation tools, such as search bars and filter options, which help users locate specific information and navigate large databases/datasets. Additionally, we assessed the presence of analytical and interactive features, including data visualisation tools such as maps, tables, and graphs (all of these being either interactive or static), which enhance the usability and interpretability of the data provided by these repositories. These elements collectively determine how accessible, functional, and user-friendly a repository is for its intended audience. Almost all 15 evaluated repositories include basic search and filter functions. These tools generally fall into two categories: search boxes and filtering options. The search box feature allows users to perform keyword-based searches within the repository. This function enables users to input specific terms or phrases—such as the name of a country, a health condition, or a policy title—to quickly retrieve relevant results. This free-text search capability is particularly useful for targeted queries where users know what they are looking for. On the other hand, the filter functions allow users to narrow down data based on predefined criteria. In the 15 repositories we evaluated, common filtering options allow users to isolate health policy documents specific to a particular country or region, making it easier to explore country-specific data. Similarly, narrowing down by health focus area is common, where data (health policy documents in this case) are subsequently organised by thematic disease categories or broader public health topics. These filter options help users refine their search according to specific health priorities or geographical interests. While the implementation of these features was generally consistent across repositories, their effectiveness often depends on the quality of data and tagging (metadata) within the repository, which can influence the precision and relevance of search results. The availability of functionality and visualisation features varies across repositories. Figure 1 highlights the functionality (such as search and filtering) and visualisation (static or interactive maps, graphs, and tables) features based on the focus areas of the repositories. Repositories focused on HIV/AIDS and broader health scopes offer a wide range of functionality and visualisation options. In contrast, repositories dedicated to public health and MNCH provide fewer features, with MNCH-focused repositories having the least. Notably, advanced analytical features were rare across all repositories, and none included AI-enabled tools. Figure 1. Spider diagram indicating repository functionality and visualisations based on health focus area. While our assessment of UI/UX may be subject to observer bias, it is clear that a certain level of computational competence is required to navigate and explore these repositories, let alone extract data. In many cases, expert knowledge in the field may be necessary to effectively interact with a given repository to access, use and interpret the data contained. As a result, many repositories may unintentionally or intentionally make it difficult for non-experts—such as citizens, patients, or even non-health researchers—to maximise the use of the information. Indeed, given the often relatively basic search functions to interrogate vast amounts of data, it is difficult, even for experts (policymakers, health professionals, etc) to succeed in finding what they might be looking for. Some repositories (7/15), however, do provide guides on how to access and use the data (e.g., via how-to pages or videos). Discussion This landscape analysis underscores digital repositories’ critical role in facilitating access to health policy documents, offering valuable insights into their potential to support evidence-based policymaking and health systems development. The study mapped and evaluated the scope, content, functionality, and UI/UX of digital platforms that systematically collate health policy documents. The study initially identified 59 repositories and included 15 of these in the final analysis, identifying both strengths and limitations of these infrastructures. The repositories examined contained diverse types of health policy documents, including policies, laws, national health strategies, national control plans, action plans, guidelines, and other essential resources. Defining these categories ensures standardization, promotes consistency in classification and enhances usability. To further support this effort, we compiled a list of key policy terms and definitions, detailed in Table 1 , building and expanding on various WHO sources for these terms. Despite their importance in supporting informed decision-making and knowledge sharing, the development and maintenance of health policy repositories vary significantly across health sectors and regions. While some repositories are well-established, benefiting from consistent updates and robust maintenance systems, others face substantial challenges that hinder their effectiveness and sustainability. If left unaddressed, these challenges limit the ability of repositories to serve as comprehensive, reliable, and accessible sources of policy information. Below, we discuss some of the key findings from the landscape analysis and highlight some key challenges identified in the repositories. Data content: Scope and content of digital repositories More than half of the 15 repositories we evaluated dedicate their content to specific health focus areas, including HIV/AIDS, NCDs, or MNCH, while the rest cover a wide range of public health topics more generally. This pattern appears to be influenced by several factors. Many of the included repositories were established by NGOs and United Nations (UN) agencies, suggesting that the focus areas are shaped by the interests and mandates of the organisations setting them up, the specific needs they aim to address, and the funding available to support their work. For example, HIV/AIDS has historically benefited from significant funding, which likely contributed to the establishment of specialised repositories. Additionally, the methodology and processes used to collate data play a critical role. For instance, the WHO bases its repositories on information provided by member states, which, in turn, depends on the type of questionnaires and data requests sent by the organisation. If certain topics are not prioritised in these requests, there is little chance of developing repositories in those areas. This combination of organisational focus, resource availability, and data collection processes shapes the current landscape of health policy repositories. Several critical health issues remain underrepresented and topics such as neglected tropical diseases, vaccine-preventable diseases, mental health, and cross-cutting themes like Universal Health Coverage (UHC) or health equity are notably absent. Emerging health challenges, such as pandemics and outbreaks of diseases like SARS, Marburg, and Ebola viruses, are particularly underrepresented. Only one repository (the COVID-19 Law Lab ) was dedicated to collating health policy documents on rapidly evolving issues such as (re) emerging infectious diseases that pose a risk of developing into an epidemic or pandemic, including Ebola, Mpox, or other potential zoonotic outbreaks. It is important to note that the review did not evaluate this repository, since it was identified after our data collection period had closed. This gap in available policy resources for emerging and re-emerging health threats underscores the urgent need for dedicated repositories that can address rapidly evolving health crises and provide timely, actionable policy resources. Arguably, repositories that are disease-agnostic and inclusive of all health areas should generally be more useful to a wider user base globally - provided that the content navigation functions are excellent. As outlined above, search functions tend to be too basic to successfully mine large data content. Repositories with a focus on a given health area may thus be more amenable to being accessed if users are interested in a specific health area or disease, risk factor or cross-cutting health area (e.g., health financing). While many of the health policy repositories evaluated claim to offer comprehensive coverage of global health policy documents, a closer inspection reveals significant regional disparities, particularly in the representation of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). These disparities stem from several interrelated factors, including limited institutional capacity for documentation and digitization, inadequate funding for repository maintenance, and a lack of technical expertise in these regions. Further, language plays a critical role and a limitation in our review. The mapping exercise focused on repositories where the content was either available in English or offered an English translation as one of their languages, limiting the breadth of data within repositories and the number of repositories we included in our analysis. As a result, health policies from LMICs are often either underrepresented or absent from global platforms, perpetuating a cycle of marginalisation where these regions cannot share their successful innovations and policies on a global stage. The absence of LMIC health policy documentation and digital repositories presents critical challenges to achieving equity in global health governance. Without access to comprehensive repositories that include LMIC policy documents, researchers, policymakers, and practitioners risk making decisions that overlook region-specific health challenges, socioeconomic conditions, and cultural contexts. Policy documents addressing key issues, including infectious disease outbreaks, climate change impacts, or health system strengthening in resource-constrained settings, often provide valuable lessons for other countries facing similar challenges. However, the absence of such policies in accessible repositories prevents these lessons from being adapted or scaled in other contexts and limits opportunities for international learning and collaboration. Bridging this digital divide and gap in accessibility of health policy data between HIC and LMICs requires targeted efforts, such as fostering new and existing partnerships between South-South and North-South institutions and initiatives, investing in capacity-strengthening activities, and ensuring sustainable funding for the inclusion and maintenance of LMIC data in global health repositories. Addressing these disparities is essential for creating truly global and equitable health policy platforms that foster inclusivity, knowledge sharing, and collaboration across diverse contexts. Guiding principles: Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability of data content Adherence to the FAIR principles—Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability—is crucial for enhancing the usability and impact of data within health policy repositories. These principles emphasize “machine-actionability,” meaning that computational systems should be able to find, access, interoperate, and reuse data with minimal human intervention. This is particularly important as the volume, complexity, and speed of data creation increase, requiring more computational support. 14 Adherence to the FAIR principles varied widely across the repositories analysed, with many failing to explicitly incorporate these guidelines into their design and functionality. While some repositories excelled in findability and accessibility, others faced significant challenges with interoperability and reusability. 15 For example, few repositories employed unique identifiers for health policy documents or provided clear data usage licenses, which are essential for ensuring data can be easily located, accessed, integrated, and reused effectively. In addition to these challenges, inadequate metadata standards 14 and poor data interoperability further undermine the effectiveness of many repositories. These shortcomings reduce their ability to function as comprehensive, reliable sources of health policy information and limit their potential to support evidence-based decision-making, knowledge sharing, and collaboration. 16 Restricted access, including requirements for subscriptions, organisational affiliations, or specific credentials, also creates barriers, particularly for stakeholders in low-resource settings. This exclusivity undermines the inclusivity of these platforms and leaves critical users—such as community leaders, advocates, and smaller health organisations—unable to benefit from the resources available. Notably, we excluded seven repositories from our evaluation due to such restrictions, though we included repositories with limited or partial access. The absence of primary data source linkage is a substantial limitation in numerous repositories we evaluated, a void that is closely associated with deficiencies in the FAIR principles. This problem considerably impedes users’ capacity to verify the content of policies, trace their origins, or access supporting evidence. Researchers, policymakers, and other stakeholders who depend on a comprehensive comprehension of the policy landscape to inform decision-making are impeded by the absence of such linkages. It is difficult to contextualise or compare policies or evaluate their alignment with evidence-based practices in the absence of direct connections to underlying data sources, such as national health databases, program reports, or epidemiological studies. For instance, users who are endeavouring to analyse a national health strategy or assess its efficacy may encounter challenges in identifying the data that influenced its development. This can result in the inability to validate assumptions or make meaningful comparisons between regions or time periods. Similarly, identifying existing health policy documents as exemplars for potential adaptation to other settings is hampered by the inaccessibility of much of these data nationally and globally. Furthermore, repositories’ effectiveness as instruments for promoting transparency and accountability are restricted by their absence of linked data sources. It becomes more difficult to evaluate the development, implementation, and reliability of policies in the absence of accessible primary source documents. This may erode the trust of stakeholders in the repository as a dependable source of information. The absence of linked data sources also diminishes interoperability with other digital health platforms from a technological standpoint. Richer analyses, such as modelling the impact of policy decisions or identifying voids in resource allocation, could be facilitated by the integration of datasets from health systems, demographic surveys, or financial resources. Repositories that lack these linkages are unable to accommodate such sophisticated use cases, which restricts their capacity to inform the comprehensive strengthening of health systems. As such, addressing these challenges through more robust adherence to the FAIR principles will be essential for optimizing the role of digital repositories in advancing health systems and policy development, ensuring they can be used as comprehensive and reliable resources for all stakeholders. Platform and technological aspects: User interface and experience (UI/UX) The user interface and experience (UI/UX) of health policy document repositories play a crucial role in determining how effectively users can access, navigate, and utilize the information. While many repositories offer basic search and filtering options, the functionality and quality of these tools are often constrained by the underlying data and metadata. This may be due to a lack of funding or technical expertise to develop advanced UI/UX features, such as data visualization tools or AI-enabled analytics, which are rare in most of repositories we assessed. These advanced features could significantly enhance user engagement and analytical capabilities, but they often require specialized knowledge to interpret, potentially limiting accessibility for non-experts, such as community advocates or policymakers without technical backgrounds. As a result, these platforms may fall short in supporting inclusive, evidence-based decision-making. Furthermore, outdated technological infrastructure and limited capacity for adaptation can significantly hinder the effectiveness of digital health repositories. Many platforms lack regular updates to incorporate modern functionalities, such as AI-enabled analytics or mobile-responsive designs, increasing the risk of obsolescence. The absence of these functionalities complicates the process of analysing and understanding policy information, limiting their utility. Although AI holds great potential to enhance these repositories, its application is not without challenges. AI tools may perpetuate biases present in their underpinning algorithms or training data, leading to skewed insights that can misguide the interpretation of outputs and if applicable decision-making. Additionally, the high costs and technical expertise required to implement and maintain AI-driven solutions create significant barriers, particularly in resource-limited settings. Unless these technological and practical challenges are addressed, repositories may struggle to meet the evolving needs of diverse users. Assessing UI/UX is inherently subjective, influenced by users’ familiarity with digital platforms, professional expertise, and personal preferences. Therefore, perceptions of ease of use, navigation efficiency, and aesthetic appeal can vary widely. Our evaluation acknowledges this limitation and suggests that a more comprehensive assessment would involve engaging a diverse group of end-users in testing and providing feedback. This approach would offer a broader perspective on how repositories meet user needs and identify areas for improvement, ensuring these platforms are accessible and functional for all stakeholders. Lastly, sustainability is another pressing concern for many repositories, especially those dependent on short-term or project-based funding. Funder-driven platforms often face uncertainty once the funding cycle ends, leading to stagnation, reduced updates, or even closure. This reliance on external support undermines the long-term viability of these platforms, compromising their capacity to remain relevant and effective in providing up-to-date policy information and responding to evolving health policy needs. Concluding recommendations This landscape analysis highlights the immense value of digital repositories for health policy and the potential of such infrastructures to positively shape evidence-based health policy decision-making, going forward. To realise this potential, we propose for existing and new repositories for health policy the following: Data content: • Systematically collate globally relevant, multi-lingual, and health-area-agnostic information : This will enable shared learning, reduce redundancy, improve transparency, and support equity in health policy development. • Expand and enhance repositories to include underserved geographies and health topics : Addressing disparities, particularly in LMICs, ensures inclusivity and responsiveness to emerging global challenges. Platform and technological aspects: • Invest in inclusive, sustainable, and adaptive digital platforms : Resources should focus on platforms that evolve with global health priorities and technological advancements to meet dynamic policy needs. • Enhance functionality and user-friendliness of repositories across all health areas : Learn from advancements in HIV/AIDS repositories and apply best practices to other health topics to ensure usability and efficiency. Guiding principles: • Adhere to FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) : This framework optimises usability and maximises the impact of health policy repositories for stakeholders. • Foster cross-sector collaboration to address gaps : Engaging diverse stakeholders will drive the development of equitable, high-functioning repositories and strengthen evidence-driven global health policy systems. To unlock the full potential of health policy repositories, the identified challenges must be systematically addressed. Lastly, addressing these gaps will require fostering cross-sector collaboration to address gaps - engaging diverse stakeholders will drive the development of equitable, inclusive, high-functioning repositories and strengthen evidence-driven global health policy systems. Ethics and consent Ethical approval and consent were not required. Data availability statement No data are associated with this article. Extended data Figshare. Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28658861.v5 (Somanje et al. (2025)). This project contains the following extended data: ○ 20250306_Landscape_Analysis_appendix1.xlsx ○ Search terms.docx ○ PRISMA flow chart.png ○ List of excluded repositories.docx ○ Summary of Digital Repositories for Health Policy included in our evaluation.xlsx ○ PRISMA checklist.docx Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Acknowledgements We thank Michael Bayerlein of the Global Health Policy Lab (GHPL), Charité Center for Global Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany for reviewing the draft manuscript. References 1. Katwan E, Bisoborwa G, Butron-Riveros B, et al. : Creating a Global Legal and Policy Database and Document Repository: Challenges and Lessons Learned from the World Health Organization Sexual, Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health Policy Survey. Int. J. Health Policy Manag. 2022 Nov 1; 11 (11): 2415–2421. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 2. Schmets G, Kadandale S, Porignon D, et al. : Chapter 1 Introduction: Strategizing national health in the 21st century.2016; 36. 3. World Health Organization Health Systems Strengthening. 4. GUIDELINES FOR WHO GUIDELINES: Global Programme on Evidence for Health Policy. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. 5. ChatGPT: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 6. Global Health Observatory: [cited 2025 Jan 8]. Reference Source 7. The Lancet Global Health Hub: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 8. DASH Home: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 9. WHO Collaborating Center for National and Global Health Law - O’Neill: O’Neill.[cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 10. Health Systems Evidence: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 11. Policy Commons: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 12. Welcome to Overton|Overton: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 13. Better policies for better lives. OECD; [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 14. FAIR Principles - GO FAIR: [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Reference Source 15. Conway P: Archival quality and long-term preservation: A research framework for validating the usefulness of digital surrogates. Arch. Sci. 2011 Nov; 11 (3–4): 293–309. Publisher Full Text 16. Mosha NF, Ngulube P: Metadata Standard for Continuous Preservation, Discovery, and Reuse of Research Data in Repositories by Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Review. Vol. 14, Information (Switzerland). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI); 2023. Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 12 May 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 African Institute for Development Policy Malawi Office, Lilongwe, Central Region, Malawi 2 Independent Global Health Consultant, Southampton, UK 3 SICABO consulting, Zurich, Switzerland 4 Global Health Policy Lab, Virchow Foundation, Berlin, Germany 5 Global Health Policy Lab, Charité Centre for Global Health, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany Chifuniro Somanje Mankhwala Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Michael Give Chipeta Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Writing – Review & Editing Tabitha Nina Ngwira Roles: Data Curation, Writing – Review & Editing McEwen Khundi Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Brewster Moyo Roles: Data Curation, Writing – Review & Editing Themba Mzembe Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Nyovani Janet Madise Roles: Funding Acquisition, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Simone Bösch Roles: Investigation, Writing – Review & Editing Branwen J Hennig Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This work was supported by funding to the Global Health Policy Lab (GHPL) Initiative from the Novartis Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, and Novo Nordisk. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Article Versions (1) version 1 Published: 12 May 2025, 14:487 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 Copyright © 2025 Somanje Mankhwala C et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Somanje Mankhwala C, Chipeta MG, Ngwira TN et al. Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.162163.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 12 May 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Dalglish SL. Reviewer Report For: Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.178312.r391102 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1#referee-response-391102 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 05 Nov 2025 Sarah L Dalglish , Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,, Baltimore, MD, USA Not Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.178312.r391102 Thank you for the opportunity to review this article, which provides a highly useful review of existing health policy repositories and analyzes aspects of their design and functionality such as their adherence to FAIR principles and user interface / experiences. ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for the opportunity to review this article, which provides a highly useful review of existing health policy repositories and analyzes aspects of their design and functionality such as their adherence to FAIR principles and user interface / experiences. In addition to provide a landscaping of such repositories, it also lays out relevant recommendations for improving them in the future. The review would be strengthened by more information about certain aspects of its methodology, improved referencing and links to the health policy literature, and greater detail with respect to the repositories included in the review. Major comments The Introduction would benefit from greater engagement with the health policy literature - there isn't a single reference to this literature (or any other publications) in either paragraph. For example, where have you drawn the definition of different types of health policy? See, for example, "Making Health Policy" (Buse, Mays et al 2023). The introduction should also mention when, why and how such repositories have been used, either in the scientific or gray literature. What is currently being done with such repositories? This would really help situate and justify your review. Methodology - citations and contextualization are needed in your discussions of FAIR principles and UI/UX. These may be widely used categories but they should be referenced to help readers understand where they originated and why they are applicable in this context. Table 1 - there seems to be a problem where there are two Tables 1's - the glossary of key policy terms and the summary of data repositories. If the latter is not included in the manuscript as a table, it should be. The manuscript mentions that data from LMICs are scarce, and this is an important finding - but the methodology does not mention how this is ascertained. This omission needs to be rectified, with more details provided on both the methodology and finding. This is also brought up in the discussion section, which a discussion of what these disparities stem from, but without any reference to back up the statement. Overall comment - it would be useful to readers to call out which repositories are doing things well by the standards laid out in this article. For example, which repositories link to source documents? Which have good data visualizations? Which best adhered to FAIR principles? etc. This will allow readers to better understand the landscape and explore it themselves. For example, in the discussion, it's stated that "some repositories are well-established, benefiting from consistent updates and robust maintenance systems" - which are these? Figure 1, spider diagram - this visual is hard to parse. Do the numbers correspond to the number of repositories that provide each functionality? If so, isn't it unfair to compare databases by health topic, as, for example, there is only 1 maternal/child database compared to 4-5 databases on HIV/AIDS? If yes, I would suggest presenting the data without differentiating by topic area. Additionally, there is a problem with the caption under "data selection." Discussion - authors state that this landscape analysis "underscores digital repositories critical role in facilitating access to health policy documents," but there is no evidence provided of this, either by referring to the scientific literature or other sources (and no reference is cited). This is where an engagement with the literature using these repositories, either in the introduction or discussion (or both) would strengthen the claims of this manuscript. Who is using these repositories? See also the last paragraph under Data content - "Policy documents ... often provide valuable lessons for other countries" - references needed Data content and scope - unless I'm mistaken, there's no mention of how many policies are included in each of the data repositories. Adding information on this (e.g. to the summary table) would really help readers get a grasp on the scope of these repositories. It seems like these repositories are an excellent test case for AI applications. This is mentioned in the manuscript but it would be interesting to hear the authors' further thoughts on the likely utility, feasibility, etc, of using AI to mine and analyze these databases. Underlying data sources (under Discussion/FAIR) - while it seems fair to ask that these repositories contain links to (or PDFs of) the source documents, it seems like a big ask that they link to all underlying source data. Are there actual examples of this being done? Minor comments In the list of excluded repositories: note that WHO-hosted repositories are not necessarily funded by member states. A significant portion of WHO funded is from private philanthropies, (directed) voluntary contributions, etc. In Table 1 (summary of policy repositories): repeat the header row across pages specify which NGO hosts the repository Results, part 1 (Health policy document focus) - Table 2 is mentioned, whereas it should refer to the summary of policy repositories Results, last paragraph - when referring to "expert knowledge in the field," do you mean health policy or database design? Greater detail here would be helpful. Discussion, first paraph - I would suggest that it's not necessary to focus on categorizing different types of policy documents, as these are not standardized and likely to vary across countries. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: health policy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Dalglish SL. Reviewer Report For: Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.178312.r391102 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1#referee-response-391102 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 12 May 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 Version 1 12 May 25 read Sarah L Dalglish , Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,, Baltimore, USA Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Dalglish S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 05 Nov 2025 | for Version 1 Sarah L Dalglish , Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,, Baltimore, MD, USA 0 Views copyright © 2025 Dalglish S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Not Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for the opportunity to review this article, which provides a highly useful review of existing health policy repositories and analyzes aspects of their design and functionality such as their adherence to FAIR principles and user interface / experiences. In addition to provide a landscaping of such repositories, it also lays out relevant recommendations for improving them in the future. The review would be strengthened by more information about certain aspects of its methodology, improved referencing and links to the health policy literature, and greater detail with respect to the repositories included in the review. Major comments The Introduction would benefit from greater engagement with the health policy literature - there isn't a single reference to this literature (or any other publications) in either paragraph. For example, where have you drawn the definition of different types of health policy? See, for example, "Making Health Policy" (Buse, Mays et al 2023). The introduction should also mention when, why and how such repositories have been used, either in the scientific or gray literature. What is currently being done with such repositories? This would really help situate and justify your review. Methodology - citations and contextualization are needed in your discussions of FAIR principles and UI/UX. These may be widely used categories but they should be referenced to help readers understand where they originated and why they are applicable in this context. Table 1 - there seems to be a problem where there are two Tables 1's - the glossary of key policy terms and the summary of data repositories. If the latter is not included in the manuscript as a table, it should be. The manuscript mentions that data from LMICs are scarce, and this is an important finding - but the methodology does not mention how this is ascertained. This omission needs to be rectified, with more details provided on both the methodology and finding. This is also brought up in the discussion section, which a discussion of what these disparities stem from, but without any reference to back up the statement. Overall comment - it would be useful to readers to call out which repositories are doing things well by the standards laid out in this article. For example, which repositories link to source documents? Which have good data visualizations? Which best adhered to FAIR principles? etc. This will allow readers to better understand the landscape and explore it themselves. For example, in the discussion, it's stated that "some repositories are well-established, benefiting from consistent updates and robust maintenance systems" - which are these? Figure 1, spider diagram - this visual is hard to parse. Do the numbers correspond to the number of repositories that provide each functionality? If so, isn't it unfair to compare databases by health topic, as, for example, there is only 1 maternal/child database compared to 4-5 databases on HIV/AIDS? If yes, I would suggest presenting the data without differentiating by topic area. Additionally, there is a problem with the caption under "data selection." Discussion - authors state that this landscape analysis "underscores digital repositories critical role in facilitating access to health policy documents," but there is no evidence provided of this, either by referring to the scientific literature or other sources (and no reference is cited). This is where an engagement with the literature using these repositories, either in the introduction or discussion (or both) would strengthen the claims of this manuscript. Who is using these repositories? See also the last paragraph under Data content - "Policy documents ... often provide valuable lessons for other countries" - references needed Data content and scope - unless I'm mistaken, there's no mention of how many policies are included in each of the data repositories. Adding information on this (e.g. to the summary table) would really help readers get a grasp on the scope of these repositories. It seems like these repositories are an excellent test case for AI applications. This is mentioned in the manuscript but it would be interesting to hear the authors' further thoughts on the likely utility, feasibility, etc, of using AI to mine and analyze these databases. Underlying data sources (under Discussion/FAIR) - while it seems fair to ask that these repositories contain links to (or PDFs of) the source documents, it seems like a big ask that they link to all underlying source data. Are there actual examples of this being done? Minor comments In the list of excluded repositories: note that WHO-hosted repositories are not necessarily funded by member states. A significant portion of WHO funded is from private philanthropies, (directed) voluntary contributions, etc. In Table 1 (summary of policy repositories): repeat the header row across pages specify which NGO hosts the repository Results, part 1 (Health policy document focus) - Table 2 is mentioned, whereas it should refer to the summary of policy repositories Results, last paragraph - when referring to "expert knowledge in the field," do you mean health policy or database design? Greater detail here would be helpful. Discussion, first paraph - I would suggest that it's not necessary to focus on categorizing different types of policy documents, as these are not standardized and likely to vary across countries. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise health policy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Dalglish SL. Peer Review Report For: Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing digital health policy repositories. [version 1; peer review: 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :487 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.178312.r391102) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1#referee-response-391102 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Somanje Mankhwala C et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487", templates : { twitter : "Health policy at your fingertips? Mapping and evaluation of existing.... Somanje Mankhwala C et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-487/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/162163/178312") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "178312"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "386693": 0, "384901": 0, "386692": 0, "384900": 0, "386695": 0, "404740": 0, "384903": 0, "386694": 0, "404741": 0, "384902": 0, "386689": 0, "404738": 0, "384897": 0, "386688": 0, "404739": 0, "384896": 0, "386691": 0, "404736": 0, "384899": 0, "386690": 0, "404737": 0, "384898": 0, "386697": 0, "384905": 0, "386696": 0, "384904": 0, "391101": 0, "391103": 0, "391102": 9, "391109": 0, "391108": 0, "391111": 0, "391110": 0, "391105": 0, "391104": 0, "391107": 0, "391106": 0, "388957": 0, "388956": 0, "388959": 0, "388958": 0, "388953": 0, "388952": 0, "388955": 0, "388954": 0, "388960": 0, "404734": 0, "404735": 0, "404732": 0, "404733": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "8c3e40b9-c0ec-401f-b152-f297976c0163"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });