Department of Health, Aging and society, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
McMaster University, 30 Huntingwood Avenue, Dundas, ON, Canada.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Nov 7;16(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0384-z.
Priority-setting (PS) for health research presents an opportunity for the relevant stakeholders to identify and create a list of priorities that reflects the country's knowledge needs. Zambia has conducted several health research prioritisation exercises that have never been evaluated. Evaluation would facilitate gleaning of lessons of good practices that can be shared as well as the identification of areas of improvement. This paper describes and evaluates health research PS in Zambia from the perspectives of key stakeholders using an internationally validated evaluation framework.
This was a qualitative study based on 28 in-depth interviews with stakeholders who had participated in the PS exercises. An interview guide was employed. Data were analysed using NVIVO 10. Emerging themes were, in turn, compared to the framework parameters.
Respondents reported that, while the Zambian political, economic, social and cultural context was conducive, there was a lack of co-ordination of funding sources, partners and research priorities. Although participatory, the process lacked community involvement, dissemination strategies and appeals mechanisms. Limited funding hampered implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Research was largely driven by the research funders.
Although there is apparent commitment to health research in Zambia, health research PS is limited by lack of funding, and consistently used explicit and fair processes. The designated national research organisation and the availability of tools that have been validated and pilot tested within Zambia provide an opportunity for focused capacity strengthening for systematic prioritisation, monitoring and evaluation. The utility of the evaluation framework in Zambia could indicate potential usefulness in similar low-income countries.
健康研究的优先排序（PS）为相关利益攸关方提供了一个机会，以确定并创建一份反映国家知识需求的优先事项清单。赞比亚已经进行了几次健康研究优先排序活动，但从未进行过评估。评估将有助于汲取良好实践的经验教训，并确定需要改进的领域。本文从利益攸关方的角度描述和评估了赞比亚的健康研究 PS，使用了国际上经过验证的评估框架。
这是一项基于对参与 PS 活动的利益攸关方进行的 28 次深入访谈的定性研究。采用访谈指南。使用 NVIVO 10 对数据进行分析。新兴主题依次与框架参数进行比较。
受访者报告称，尽管赞比亚的政治、经济、社会和文化环境有利，但资金来源、合作伙伴和研究优先事项缺乏协调。虽然参与度很高，但该过程缺乏社区参与、传播策略和呼吁机制。有限的资金阻碍了实施、监测和评估。研究主要由研究资助者推动。
尽管赞比亚显然致力于健康研究，但健康研究 PS 受到资金短缺的限制，并且始终使用明确和公平的流程。指定的国家研究组织和在赞比亚内部经过验证和试点测试的工具的可用性为有针对性地加强系统优先排序、监测和评估提供了机会。该评估框架在赞比亚的实用性表明它在类似的低收入国家可能具有潜在的用途。
