Franzen Samuel R P, Chandler Clare, Lang Trudie
The Global Health Network, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Oxford Policy Management, Oxford, UK.
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 27;7(1):e012332. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012332.
Locally led health research in low and middle income countries (LMICs) is critical for overcoming global health challenges. Yet, despite over 25 years of international efforts, health research capacity in LMICs remains insufficient and development attempts continue to be fragmented. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and critically examine the main approaches and trends in health research capacity development and consolidate key thinking to identify a more coherent approach.
This review includes academic and grey literature published between January 2000 and July 2013. Using a predetermined search strategy, we systematically searched PubMed, hand-searched Google Scholar and checked reference lists. This process yielded 1668 papers. 240 papers were selected based on a priori criteria. A modified version of meta-narrative synthesis was used to analyse the papers.
3 key narratives were identified: the effect of power relations on capacity development; demand for stronger links between research, policy and practice and the importance of a systems approach. Capacity development was delivered through 4 main modalities: vertical research projects, centres of excellence, North-South partnerships and networks; all were controversial, and each had their strengths and weaknesses. A plurality of development strategies was employed to address specific barriers to health research. However, lack of empirical research and monitoring and evaluation meant that their effectiveness was unclear and learning was weak.
There has been steady progress in LMIC health research capacity, but major barriers to research persist and more empirical evidence on development strategies is required. Despite an evolution in development thinking, international actors continue to use outdated development models that are recognised as ineffective. To realise newer development thinking, research capacity outcomes need to be equally valued as research outputs. While some development actors are now adopting this dedicated capacity development approach, they are in the minority.
中低收入国家由本地主导的卫生研究对于应对全球卫生挑战至关重要。然而,尽管经过25年多的国际努力,中低收入国家的卫生研究能力仍然不足,发展尝试也依然零散。本系统评价的目的是识别并批判性地审视卫生研究能力发展的主要方法和趋势,并整合关键思路以确定一种更连贯的方法。
本评价纳入了2000年1月至2013年7月发表的学术文献和灰色文献。使用预先确定的检索策略,我们系统检索了PubMed,手动检索了谷歌学术并检查了参考文献列表。这一过程共获得1668篇论文。根据预先设定的标准筛选出240篇论文。采用元叙事综合法的修改版对这些论文进行分析。
识别出3个关键叙事:权力关系对能力发展的影响;对加强研究、政策和实践之间联系的需求以及系统方法的重要性。能力发展通过4种主要模式实现:纵向研究项目、卓越中心、南北伙伴关系和网络;所有这些模式都存在争议,且各有优缺点。采用了多种发展战略来应对卫生研究的具体障碍。然而,缺乏实证研究以及监测和评估意味着其有效性尚不清楚,经验总结也很薄弱。
中低收入国家的卫生研究能力取得了稳步进展,但研究的主要障碍依然存在,需要更多关于发展战略的实证证据。尽管发展思路有所演变,但国际行为体仍在使用被认为无效的过时发展模式。为了实现更新的发展思路,研究能力成果应与研究产出得到同等重视。虽然现在一些发展行为体正在采用这种专门的能力发展方法,但它们只是少数。