Hodson Daniel Z, Etoundi Yannick Mbarga, Parikh Sunil, Boum Yap
Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States of America.
Douala Military Hospital, Douala, Cameroon.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023 Jan 18;3(1):e0001418. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001418. eCollection 2023.
Interest in "global health" among schools of medicine, public health, and other health disciplines in high-income countries (HIC) continues to rise. Persistent power imbalances, racism, and maintenance of colonialism/neocolonialism plague global health efforts, including global health scholarship. Scholarly projects conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) by trainees at these schools in HIC often exacerbate these problems. Drawing on published literature and shared experiences, we review key inequalities within each phase of research, from design through implementation and analysis/dissemination, and make concrete and practical recommendations to improve equity at each stage. Key problems facing global health scholarship include HIC-centric nature of global health organizations, paucity of funding directly available for LMIC investigators and trainees, misplaced emphasis on HIC selected issues rather than local solutions to local problems, the dominance of English language in the scientific literature, and exploitation of LMIC team members. Four key principles lie at the foundation of all our recommendations: 1) seek locally derived and relevant solutions to global health issues, 2) create paired collaborations between HIC and LMIC institutions at all levels of training, 3) provide funding for both HIC and LMIC team members, 4) assign clear roles and responsibilities to value, leverage, and share the strengths of all team members. When funding for global health research is predicated upon more ethical and equitable collaborations, the nature of global health collaborations will evolve to be more ethical and equitable. Therefore, we propose the Douala Equity Checklist as a 20-item tool HIC and LMIC institutions can use throughout the conduct of global health projects to ensure more equitable collaborations.
高收入国家(HIC)的医学院、公共卫生学院及其他卫生学科对“全球健康”的兴趣持续上升。持续存在的权力失衡、种族主义以及殖民主义/新殖民主义的延续困扰着全球健康事业,包括全球健康学术研究。这些高收入国家学校的学员在低收入和中等收入国家(LMIC)开展的学术项目往往会加剧这些问题。借鉴已发表的文献和共同经验,我们审视了从设计到实施再到分析/传播的研究各阶段存在的关键不平等现象,并提出具体可行的建议以在每个阶段提高公平性。全球健康学术研究面临的关键问题包括全球健康组织以高收入国家为中心的性质、直接提供给低收入和中等收入国家研究人员及学员的资金匮乏、对高收入国家选定问题的过度关注而非针对当地问题的本土解决方案、科学文献中英语的主导地位以及对低收入和中等收入国家团队成员的剥削。我们所有建议都基于四项关键原则:1)寻求针对全球健康问题的本土衍生且相关的解决方案;2)在各级培训中建立高收入国家和低收入和中等收入国家机构之间的配对合作;3)为高收入国家和低收入和中等收入国家的团队成员都提供资金;4)明确角色和职责以重视、利用和分享所有团队成员的优势。当全球健康研究的资金基于更具道德和公平性的合作时,全球健康合作的性质将朝着更具道德和公平性的方向发展。因此,我们提出《杜阿拉公平检查表》作为一个包含20项内容的工具,高收入国家和低收入和中等收入国家的机构在开展全球健康项目的全过程中都可以使用,以确保更公平的合作。