scholarly journals Practical actions for fostering cross-disciplinary global health research: lessons from a narrative literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. e002293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Ding ◽  
Justin Pulford ◽  
Imelda Bates
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Team ◽  
Ecological Model ◽  
High Income ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Design And Implementation

IntroductionGlobal health research involves disciplines within and beyond the health sciences. A cross-disciplinary collaborative research approach enables an interchange of knowledge and experience and stimulates innovative responses to complex health challenges. However, there is little robust evidence to guide the design and implementation of cross-disciplinary research in global health, hampering effective collective action. This review synthesised evidence on practical actions for fostering cross-disciplinary research to provide guidance on the design and implementation of research in global health.MethodsWe searched five electronic databases using key words. The search included original research and research notes articles in English. We used a framework adapted from the socio-ecological model and thematic synthesis for data analysis.ResultsThirty-six original research and 27 research notes articles were included in the review. These were predominantly from high-income countries and indicated that practical actions on fostering cross-disciplinary research are closely linked to leadership and teamwork which should be planned and implemented at research team and institutional levels. The publications also indicated that individual qualities such as being receptive to new ideas and funders’ power and influence have practical implications for conducting cross-disciplinary research. Practical actions that individuals, research team leaders, academic institutions and funders can undertake to foster cross-disciplinary research were identified.ConclusionOur review found evidence from high-income countries, not low-and-middle-income countries, about practices that can improve cross-disciplinary research in global health. Critical knowledge gaps exist around how leadership and teamwork processes can better integrate expertise from different disciplines to make cross-disciplinary research more effective.

scholarly journals The Global Cohort of Doctoral Students: Building Shared Global Health Research Capacity in High-Income and Low- and Middle-Income Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Semira Abdelmenan ◽  
Christopher T. Andersen ◽  
Fentabil Getnet ◽  
Hari S. Iyer ◽  
Kesaobaka Molebatsi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
High Income ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals Stuck in the middle: a systematic review of authorship in collaborative health research in Africa, 2014–2016

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. e001853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bethany L Hedt-Gauthier ◽  
Herve Momo Jeufack ◽  
Nicholas H Neufeld ◽  
Atalay Alem ◽  
Sara Sauer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
African Country ◽  
High Income ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Income Country ◽  
High Income Country ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
The Usa

BackgroundCollaborations are often a cornerstone of global health research. Power dynamics can shape if and how local researchers are included in manuscripts. This article investigates how international collaborations affect the representation of local authors, overall and in first and last author positions, in African health research.MethodsWe extracted papers on ‘health’ in sub-Saharan Africa indexed in PubMed and published between 2014 and 2016. The author’s affiliation was used to classify the individual as from the country of the paper’s focus, from another African country, from Europe, from the USA/Canada or from another locale. Authors classified as from the USA/Canada were further subclassified if the author was from a top US university. In primary analyses, individuals with multiple affiliations were presumed to be from a high-income country if they contained any affiliation from a high-income country. In sensitivity analyses, these individuals were presumed to be from an African country if they contained any affiliation an African country. Differences in paper characteristics and representation of local coauthors are compared by collaborative type using χ² tests.ResultsOf the 7100 articles identified, 68.3% included collaborators from the USA, Canada, Europe and/or another African country. 54.0% of all 43 429 authors and 52.9% of 7100 first authors were from the country of the paper’s focus. Representation dropped if any collaborators were from USA, Canada or Europe with the lowest representation for collaborators from top US universities—for these papers, 41.3% of all authors and 23.0% of first authors were from country of paper’s focus. Local representation was highest with collaborators from another African country. 13.5% of all papers had no local coauthors.DiscussionIndividuals, institutions and funders from high-income countries should challenge persistent power differentials in global health research. South-South collaborations can help African researchers expand technical expertise while maintaining presence on the resulting research.

scholarly journals Strengthening Mentoring in Low- and Middle-Income Countries to Advance Global Health Research: An Overview

2019 ◽  
Vol 100 (1_Suppl) ◽  
pp. 3-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andres G. Lescano ◽  
Craig R. Cohen ◽  
Tony Raj ◽  
Laetitia Rispel ◽  
Patricia J. Garcia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals Challenges and solutions: surveying researchers on what type of community engagement and involvement activities are feasible in low and middle income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e052135
Author(s):  
Karolin Kroese ◽  
Katie Porter ◽  
Heidi Surridge ◽  
Doreen Tembo
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Round Table ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Low And Middle Income

ObjectivesMeasures to limit the spread of infection during the COVID-19 global pandemic have made engaging and involving members of the community in global health research more challenging. This research aimed to explore how global health researchers adapted to the imposed pandemic measures in low and middle income countries (LMICs) and how they overcame challenges to effective community engagement and involvement (CEI).DesignA qualitative two-stage mixed-methods study involving an online survey and a virtual round table.SettingThe survey and round table were completed online.ParticipantsOf 53 participants, 43 were LMIC-based or UK-based global health researchers and/or CEI professionals, and 10 worked for the National Institute for Health Research or UK Government’s Department of Health and Social Care.Outcome measuresThis study aimed to capture data on: the number of CEI activities halted and adapted because of the COVID-19 pandemic; where CEI is possible; how it has been adapted; what the challenges and successes were; and the potential impact of adapted or halted CEI on global health research.ResultsPandemic control measures forced the majority of researchers to stop or amend their planned CEI activities. Most face-to-face CEI activities were replaced with remote methods, such as online communication. Virtual engagement enabled researchers to maintain already established relationships with community members, but was less effective when developing new relationships or addressing challenges around the inclusion of marginalised community groups.ConclusionsCOVID-19 has highlighted the need for contingency planning and flexibility in CEI. The redesigning and adopting of remote methods has come with both advantages and disadvantages, and required new skills, access to technology, funding, reliable services and enthusiasm from stakeholders. The methods suggested have the potential to augment or substitute previously preferred CEI activities. The effectiveness and impact of these remote CEI activities need to be assessed.

scholarly journals Addressing power imbalances in global health: Pre-Publication Support Services (PREPSS) for authors in low-income and middle-income countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. e002323
Author(s):  
Clara Busse ◽  
Ella August
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Support Service ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Contextual Knowledge ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Structural Inequities

The contextual knowledge and local expertise that researchers from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) contribute to studies in these settings enrich the research process and subsequent publications. However, health researchers from LMICs are under-represented in the scientific literature. Distally, power imbalances between LMICs and high-income countries, which provide funding and set priorities for research in LMICs, create structural inequities that inhibit these authors from publishing. More proximally, researchers from LMICs often lack formal training in research project management and in publishing peer-reviewed research. Though academic journals may value research from LMICs conducted by local researchers, they have limited time and financial resources to support writing, causing them to reject manuscripts with promising results if they lack development. Pre-Publication Support Service (PREPSS) is a non-profit, non-governmental organisation that works to meet this need. PREPSS provides onsite training, peer-review and copy editing services to researchers in LMICs who wish to publish their health research in peer-reviewed journals. Authors are not charged for these services. After receiving PREPSS services, authors submit their manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal. The PREPSS model is one of many interventions necessary to restructure global health research to better support health researchers in LMICs and reduce current power imbalances.

scholarly journals How global is global health research? A large-scale analysis of trends in authorship

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e003758
Author(s):  
Michelle C Dimitris ◽  
Matthew Gittings ◽  
Nicholas B King
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Income Status ◽  
Over Time

Many have called for greater inclusion of researchers from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in the conduct of global health research, yet the extent to which this occurs is unclear. Prior studies are journal-, subject-, or region-specific, largely rely on manual review, and yield varying estimates not amenable to broad evaluation of the literature. We conducted a large-scale investigation of the contribution of LMIC-affiliated researchers to published global health research and examined whether this contribution differed over time. We searched titles, abstracts, and keywords for the names of countries ever classified as low-, lower middle-, or upper middle-income by the World Bank, and limited our search to items published from 2000 to 2017 in health science-related journals. Publication metadata were obtained from Elsevier/Scopus and analysed in statistical software. We calculated proportions of publications with any, first, and last authors affiliated with any LMIC as well as the same LMIC(s) identified in the title/abstract/keywords, and stratified analyses by year, country, and countries’ most common income status. We analysed 786 779 publications and found that 86.0% included at least one LMIC-affiliated author, while 77.2% and 71.2% had an LMIC-affiliated first or last author, respectively; however, analagous proportions were only 58.7%, 36.8%, and 29.1% among 100 687 publications about low-income countries. Proportions of publications with LMIC-affiliated authors increased over time, yet this observation was driven by high research activity and representation among upper middle-income countries. Between-country variation in representation was observed, even within income status categories. We invite comment regarding these findings, particularly from voices underrepresented in this field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document