VanderZanden Amelia, Langlois Etienne V, Ghaffar Abdul, Bitton Asaf, Fifield Jocelyn, Hirschhorn Lisa R
Ariadne Labs, Brigham and Women's Hospital & Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Aug 16;4(Suppl 8):e001450. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001450. eCollection 2019.
The increased recognition of the core role of effective primary healthcare has identified large gaps in the knowledge of components of high-quality primary healthcare systems and the need for resources positioned to better understand them. Research consortia are an effective approach to generate evidence needed to address knowledge and evidence gaps and accelerate change. However, the optimal design of consortia and guidance on design decisions is not well studied. We report on a landscape analysis to understand global health research consortium models and major design decisions that inform model choice.
We conducted a landscape analysis to identify health-related research consortia typologies and explore decision processes leading to their design and implementation. We identified and reviewed 195 research consortia, extracted data on organisation, characteristics and operations for 115 and conducted 14 key informant interviews representing 13 consortia. We analysed interviews using thematic content analysis using results to develop categories of major design choices and research consortia models, structures and processes.
Across a wide range of research consortia, the structure and function were determined by nine key design decisions that were mapped to three domains: scope: including mission and area of focus; organisational structure: including role and location of the core entity, choice of leader, governance and membership eligibility and responsibility; and funding decisions: including the funding source for research consortia operations and the funding sources and process for consortium research.
Research consortia showed important heterogeneity across the nine decision points studied and based on their goals, needs and resources. These decisions and the three emerging domains (scope, organisation and funding) offer a potential framework for new research consortia and inform the design of a proposed primary health care research consortium intended to accelerate research to improve primary health care in LMICs.
对有效初级卫生保健核心作用的认识不断提高,凸显了高质量初级卫生保健系统各组成部分知识方面的巨大差距,以及对有助于更好理解这些组成部分的资源的需求。研究联盟是生成解决知识和证据差距所需证据并加速变革的有效途径。然而,联盟的最佳设计以及设计决策的指导尚未得到充分研究。我们报告一项全景分析,以了解全球卫生研究联盟模式以及为模式选择提供依据的主要设计决策。
我们进行了一项全景分析,以确定与健康相关的研究联盟类型,并探索导致其设计和实施的决策过程。我们识别并审查了195个研究联盟,提取了115个联盟的组织、特征和运营数据,并对代表13个联盟的14名关键信息提供者进行了访谈。我们使用主题内容分析法分析访谈结果,以确定主要设计选择类别以及研究联盟的模式、结构和流程。
在广泛的研究联盟中,结构和功能由九个关键设计决策决定,这些决策可映射到三个领域:范围,包括使命和重点领域;组织结构,包括核心实体的角色和位置、领导者的选择、治理以及成员资格和责任;以及资金决策,包括研究联盟运营的资金来源以及联盟研究的资金来源和流程。
研究联盟在所研究的九个决策点上表现出重要的异质性,这取决于它们的目标、需求和资源。这些决策以及三个新出现的领域(范围、组织和资金)为新的研究联盟提供了一个潜在框架,并为拟议的旨在加速研究以改善低收入和中等收入国家初级卫生保健的初级卫生保健研究联盟的设计提供了参考。