Combatting neo-Colonialism in Health Research: What can Aboriginal Health Research Ethics and Global Health Research Ethics Teach Each Other?

2021 ◽  
pp. 155626462110582
Author(s):  
Adrian Harper ◽  
Bridget Pratt
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Aboriginal Health ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Community Control ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Aboriginal Populations

The ethics of research involving Aboriginal populations and low and middle-income country populations each developed out of a long history of exploitative research projects and partnerships. Commonalities and differences between the two fields have not yet been examined. This study undertook two independent literature searches for Aboriginal health research ethics and global health research ethics. Content analysis identified shared and differently emphasised ethical principles and concepts between the two fields. Shared ethical concepts like “benefit” and “capacity development” have been developed to guide collaborations in both Aboriginal health research and global health research. However, Aboriginal health research ethics gives much greater prominence to ethical principles that assist in decolonising research practice such as “self-determination”, “community-control”, and “community ownership”. The paper argues that global health research ethics would benefit from giving greater emphasis to these principles to guide research practice, while justice as approached in global health research ethics may inform Aboriginal health research practice. With increasing attention being drawn to the need to decolonise global health research, the lessons Aboriginal health research ethics can offer may be especially timely.

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 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 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 How to navigate the application of ethics norms in global health research: reflections based on qualitative research conducted with people with disabilities in Uganda

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muriel Mac-Seing ◽  
Louise Ringuette ◽  
Kate Zinszer ◽  
Béatrice Godard ◽  
Christina Zarowsky
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Health Research ◽  
People With Disabilities ◽  
Global Health Research ◽  
Research Participants ◽  
Research Ethics Boards ◽  
Study Participants

Abstract Background As Canadian global health researchers who conducted a qualitative study with adults with and without disabilities in Uganda, we obtained ethics approval from four institutional research ethics boards (two in Canada and two in Uganda). In Canada, research ethics boards and researchers follow the research ethics norms of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS2), and the National Guidelines for Research Involving Humans as Research Participants of Uganda (NGRU) in Uganda. The preparation and implementation of this qualitative research raised specific ethical issues related to research participant privacy and the importance of availability and management of financial resources. Main body Our field experience highlights three main issues for reflection. First, we demonstrate that, in a global health research context, methodological and logistic adjustments were necessary throughout the research implementation process to ensure the protection of study participants’ privacy, especially that of people with disabilities, despite having followed the prescribed Canadian and Ugandan ethics norms. Data collection and management plans were adapted iteratively based on local realities. Second, securing financial support as a key aspect of financial management was critical to ensure privacy through disability-sensitive data collection strategies. Without adequate funding, the recruitment of research participants based on disability type, sex, and region or the hiring of local sign language interpreters would not have been possible. Third, although the TCPS2 and NGRU underscore the significance of participants’ privacy, none of these normative documents clearly express this issue in the context of global health research and disability, nor broadly discuss the ethical issue related to financial availability and management. Conclusions Conducting research in resource limited settings and with study participants with different needs calls for a nuanced and respectful implementation of research ethics in a global health context. We recommend a greater integration in both the TCPS2 and NGRU of global health research, disability, and responsible conduct of research. This integration should also be accompanied by adequate training which can further guide researchers, be they senior, junior, or students, and funding agencies.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document