Suppr超能文献

知情的“良好”全球健康研究伙伴关系:指导原则的范围综述。

Informing 'good' global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles.

机构信息

University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

School of Kinesiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

出版信息

Glob Health Action. 2021 Jan 1;14(1):1892308. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2021.1892308.

Abstract

: Several sets of principles have been proposed to guide global health research partnerships and mitigate inequities inadvertently caused by them. The existence of multiple sets of principles poses a challenge for those seeking to critically engage with and develop their practice. Which of these is best to use, and why? To what extent, if any, is there agreement across proposed principles?: The objectives of this review were to: (1) identify and consolidate existing documents and principles to guide global health research partnerships; (2) identify areas of overlapping consensus, if any, regarding which principles are fundamental in these partnerships; (3) identify any lack of consensus in the literature on core principles to support these partnerships.: A scoping review was conducted to gather documents outlining 'principles' of good global health research partnerships. A broad search of academic databases to gather peerreviewed literature was conducted, complemented by a hand-search of key global health funding institutions for grey literature guidelines.: Our search yielded nine sets of principles designed to guide and support global health research partnerships. No single principle recurred across all documents reviewed. Most frequently cited were concerns with mutual benefits between partners (n = 6) and equity (n = 4). Despite a lack of consistency in the inclusion and definition of principles, all sources highlighted principles that identified attention to fairness, equity, or justice as an integral part of good global health research partnerships.: Lack of consensus regarding how principles are defined suggests a need for further discussion on what global health researchers mean by 'core' principles. Research partnerships should seek to interpret the practical meanings and requirements of these principles through international consultation. Finally, a need exists for tools to assist with implementation of these principles to ensure their application in research practice.

摘要

: 已经提出了多套原则来指导全球健康研究伙伴关系,并减轻它们无意中造成的不平等。多套原则的存在给那些寻求批判性参与和发展实践的人带来了挑战。最好使用哪一套,为什么?在多大程度上(如果有的话),不同的原则之间存在共识?: 本综述的目的是:(1)确定和整合现有的指导全球健康研究伙伴关系的文件和原则;(2)确定在这些伙伴关系中,哪些原则是基本的,是否存在重叠的共识;(3)确定在支持这些伙伴关系的核心原则方面,文献中是否存在任何共识的缺乏。: 进行了范围综述,以收集概述良好全球健康研究伙伴关系“原则”的文件。广泛搜索学术数据库以收集同行评议文献,并辅以对主要全球健康资助机构的文献检索,以获取灰色文献指南。: 我们的搜索结果产生了九套旨在指导和支持全球健康研究伙伴关系的原则。没有一个原则在所有审查的文件中都出现过。引用最多的是合作伙伴之间的互利(n = 6)和公平(n = 4)。尽管在原则的纳入和定义方面缺乏一致性,但所有来源都强调了将关注公平、公正或正义作为良好全球健康研究伙伴关系的一个组成部分的原则。: 缺乏关于如何定义原则的共识表明,需要进一步讨论全球健康研究人员所说的“核心”原则的含义。研究伙伴关系应通过国际协商来解释这些原则的实际意义和要求。最后,需要有工具来协助实施这些原则,以确保它们在研究实践中的应用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f5e/7954413/4ee1de02da15/ZGHA_A_1892308_F0001_OC.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验