Authorship ethics in global health research partnerships between researchers from low or middle income countries and high income countries

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.

Download Full-text

North–south collaboration and capacity development in global health research in low- and middle-income countries – the ARCADE projects

Global Health Action ◽

10.3402/gha.v9.30524 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 30524 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Salla Atkins ◽

Sophie Marsden ◽

Vishal Diwan ◽

Merrick Zwarenstein ◽

Keyword(s):

Global Health ◽

Health Research ◽

Capacity Development ◽

Global Health Research ◽

Middle Income ◽

Middle Income Countries ◽

Low And Middle Income

Download Full-text

Not enough traction: Barriers that aspiring researchers from low- and middle-income countries face in global health research

Journal of Global Health Economics and Policy ◽

10.52872/001c.25802 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Constance S. Shumba ◽

Adelaide M Lusambili

Keyword(s):

Global Health ◽

Health Research ◽

Global Health Research ◽

Middle Income ◽

Middle Income Countries ◽

Low And Middle Income

Download Full-text

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 ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052135 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

BMJ Global Health ◽

10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002323 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

BMJ Global Health ◽

10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003758 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

OC 8360 GLOBAL HEALTH RESEARCH AND ITS ROLE IN IMPROVING HEALTH AND HEALTH EQUITY IN AFRICA

BMJ Global Health ◽

10.1136/bmjgh-2019-edc.7 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 (Suppl 3) ◽

pp. A3.3-A4

Author(s):

Nchangwi Syntia Munung ◽

Jantina De Vries ◽

Bridget F Pratt

Keyword(s):

Global Health ◽

Health Equity ◽

Health Research ◽

Ethical Issues ◽

High Income ◽

Global Health Research ◽

African Countries ◽

Research Partnerships ◽

Capacity Strengthening ◽

Improve Health

BackgroundHealth research has the potential to generate knowledge that may be used to improve health and health equity. This has led to calls for African governments to dedicate at least 2% of their national budgets to heath research, but such resource allocations have never been achieved. Rather, most of health research in Africa continues to be funded by high-income countries (HICs) and involves collaborative partnerships between researchers in high-income countries and those in Africa. These research partnerships have many benefits, but they also raise ethical issues related to justice and fairness in global health research.MethodsThe ‘Research for Health Justice Framework’ makes recommendations on how global health research partnerships may foster the ideals of justice through their selection of research populations and questions, research capacity strengthening, delivery of ancillary care and the provision of post-trial benefits. We applied these criteria to collaborative genomics research consortia in Africa (an example of global health research in Africa).ResultsThe results show that the lack of national health research priorities in most African countries hinders the intention of global health actors to use global health research as a means of promoting global health equity. Furthermore, capacity building efforts need to be more coordinated and monitored. The responsibility for this lies with several actors.ConclusionThe potential for global health research to improve the health capability of countries in Africa will require that attention is paid to research that improves the health of people in Africa and that global health research partnerships identify, first and foremost, what kind of capacity strengthening is required and who is responsible for this activity. African governments and research institutions can play a role to help global health research improve health and health equity in Africa, in ways that are sustainable.

Download Full-text

Global Health Research, Anthropology and Realist Enquiry

Anthropology in Action ◽

10.3167/aia.2019.260105 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 26 (1) ◽

pp. 42-51

Author(s):

Sara Van Belle

Keyword(s):

Global Health ◽

Medical Anthropology ◽

Health Research ◽

Global Health Research ◽

Social Mechanisms ◽

Middle Income ◽

Global Issues ◽

Middle Income Countries ◽

Deep Layers ◽

Low And Middle Income

In this article, I set out to capture the dynamics of two streams within the field of global health research: realist research and medical anthropology. I critically discuss the development of methodology and practice in realist health research in low- and middle-income countries against the background of anthropological practice in global health to make claims on why realist enquiry has taken a high flight. I argue that in order to provide a contribution to today’s complex global issues, we need to adopt a pragmatic stance and move past disciplinary silos: both methodologies have the potential to be well-suited to an analysis of deep layers of context and of key social mechanisms.

Download Full-text