scholarly journals Fostering global primary care research: a capacity-building approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (7) ◽  
pp. e002470 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ponka ◽  
Megan Coffman ◽  
Krystle Elizabeth Fraser-Barclay ◽  
Richard D W Fortier ◽  
Amanda Howe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
Research Capacity Building ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Primary Care Research ◽  
Care Research

The Alma Ata and Astana Declarations reaffirm the importance of high-quality primary healthcare (PHC), yet the capacity to undertake PHC research—a core element of high-quality PHC—in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) is limited. Our aim is to explore the current risks or barriers to primary care research capacity building, identify the ongoing tensions that need to be resolved and offer some solutions, focusing on emerging contexts. This paper arose from a workshop held at the 2019 North American Primary Care Research Group Annual Meeting addressing research capacity building in LMICs. Five case studies (three from Africa, one from South-East Asia and one from South America) illustrate tensions and solutions to strengthening PHC research around the world. Research must be conducted in local contexts and be responsive to the needs of patients, populations and practitioners in the community. The case studies exemplify that research capacity can be strengthened at the micro (practice), meso (institutional) and macro (national policy and international collaboration) levels. Clinicians may lack coverage to enable research time; however, practice-based research is precisely the most relevant for PHC. Increasing research capacity requires local skills, training, investment in infrastructure, and support of local academics and PHC service providers to select, host and manage locally needed research, as well as to disseminate findings to impact local practice and policy. Reliance on funding from high-income countries may limit projects of higher priority in LMIC, and ‘brain drain’ may reduce available research support; however, we provide recommendations on how to deal with these tensions.

scholarly journals A retrospective review of primary care research projects completed by medical students at University of New South Wales Medicine

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 848-852
Author(s):  
Kerry Uebel ◽  
Maha Pervaz Iqbal ◽  
John Hall
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
Independent Learning ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Primary Care Research ◽  
Care Research ◽  
South Wales

Background and objectives It is important for medical students to learn how to conduct sound medical research by implementing their own research projects. This study describes the primary care research projects conducted by fourth-year medical students for their Independent Learning Project/Honours (ILP/Honours) at University of New South Wales (UNSW) Medicine. Methods A review was conducted of research projects undertaken by medical students at UNSW to determine the number and themes of projects on primary care topics, and the departments that supervised these projects. Results Of 3116 student research projects, 482 (15.5%) were on primary care topics. Major themes were mental health and substance abuse (90; 18.7%), aged care issues (67; 13.7%), common chronic diseases (63; 13.1%), and issues facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people or people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities (59; 12.2%). Only 134 (4.3% of the total 3116) research projects were supervised through departments with primary care academics. Discussion The ILP/Honours program gives medical students at UNSW Medicine an opportunity to conduct research on primary care topics. There needs to be more attention given to growing the research capacity of primary care academic departments.

scholarly journals African Primary Care Research: Current situation, priorities and capacity building

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Mash ◽  
Akye Essuman ◽  
Riaz Ratansi ◽  
Felicity Goodyear-Smith ◽  
Klaus Von Pressentin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
Primary Care Research ◽  
Care Research

No abstract available.

scholarly journals 'We need more big trees as well as the grass roots’: Going beyond research capacity building to develop sustainable careers in mental health research in African countries

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Langhaug ◽  
Helen Jack ◽  
Charlotte Hanlon ◽  
Stephan Holzer ◽  
Katherine Sorsdahl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Research Capacity Building ◽  
Research Culture ◽  
African Countries ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Grant Management

Abstract Background There are substantial gaps in our knowledge regarding the aetiology of mental, neurological and substance use disorders in sub-Saharan Africa, and the cost-effectiveness and scalability of interventions to reduce the burden of these conditions on the continent. To address these gaps, international investment has focussed on building research capacity, including funding doctoral students in African countries, to support development of high quality, contextually relevant interventions. Absent, however, is an understanding of how capacity building feeds into research careers.Methods Within a broader mental health research capacity-building initiative (African Mental Health Research Initiative), we conducted 52 qualitative interviews with early-career researchers, policymakers, academics, and service users from four African countries (Ethiopia, Malawi, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) and with international funders of mental health research. The interview guide focused on the research context, planning, and priorities and how respondents perceive research careers and funding. Thematic analysis was applied to the transcribed interviews.Results Five components of a research career emerged: i) research positions; ii) research skills; iii) funding; iv) research commitment from African countries; and v) advocacy. All stakeholders wanted more high-impact African researchers, but few saw a clear, replicable track for developing their careers within universities or their Ministries of Health in their African countries. This stemmed, in part, from the lack of support for infrastructure that enables high-quality research: grants administration, mentorship, university leadership, research culture, and open communication between policymakers and researchers.Conclusions This study highlights the importance of developing research infrastructure alongside capacity-building efforts. International funders should invest in grant management at African universities which would place them at the centre of research initiatives. African universities should prioritise the creation of a research culture by developing and promoting well-defined research tracks for both clinicians and academics, investing in grant management, and raising the profile of research within their institutions.

scholarly journals The IReCaB (incision Research Capacity Building): Research Skills Training Through a Trainee-led Online Course.

2021 ◽  
Vol 233 (5) ◽  
pp. e87
Author(s):  
Hamaiyal Sana ◽  
Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye ◽  
Soham Bandyopadhyay ◽  
Alejandro Munoz-Valencia ◽  
Halimah Khalil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Capacity Building ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
Online Course ◽  
Research Capacity Building ◽  
Research Skills ◽  
Building Research

scholarly journals African Primary Care Research: Performing a programme evaluation

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilian Dudley
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
Programme Evaluation ◽  
Primary Care Research ◽  
Qualitative Interviewing ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Different Types ◽  
African Context

This article is part of a series on Primary Care Research in the African context and focuses on programme evaluation. Different types of programme evaluation are outlined: developmental, process, outcome and impact. Eight steps to follow in designing your programme evaluation are then described in some detail: engage stakeholders; establish what is known; describe the programme; define the evaluation and select a study design; define the indicators; planand manage data collection and analysis; make judgements and recommendations; and disseminate the findings. Other articles in the series cover related topics such as writing your research proposal, performing a literature review, conducting surveys with questionnaires, qualitative interviewing and approaches to quantitative and qualitative data analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document