Suppr超能文献

全球健康合作研究:从强制合作到强制署名。

Global health collaborative research: beyond mandatory collaboration to mandatory authorship.

机构信息

Public Health and Nutrition Research Group, Department of Nutrition, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.

出版信息

Glob Health Res Policy. 2023 Nov 22;8(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x.

Abstract

Collaborative research between the global north and global south is common and growing in number. Due to inability of local governments to fund research, global north actors provide the bulk of research funding. While providing mutual benefits, global collaborative research projects are far from ideal. In this paper, we review the authorship discrepancies in global collaborative research, discuss preventive measures in place and their shortfalls, and recommend an intervention to address the problem. Malawi research guidelines recommend collaboration between foreign and local researchers in locally conducted research. However, there is no provision requiring joint authorship in final published papers. Journal recommendations on authorship criteria exist, but they can disadvantage low- and middle-income country researchers in collaborative projects because of exclusionary interpretations of guidelines. For example, the requirement for authors to make substantial contributions to conception or design of the work may favor research grant holders, often from the global north. Systematic and holistic changes proposed to address power asymmetries at the core of the problem have been proposed. However, these proposals may take a long time to produce change. Ad interim, local institutions can take more direct action to address inequalities by establishing offices of research integrity to enforce mandates to increase opportunities for authorship in collaborative research.

摘要

南北合作研究在全球范围内越来越普遍。由于地方政府无力提供研究资金,北方国家的行为者提供了大部分研究资金。尽管全球合作研究项目带来了互利,但它们远非理想。本文综述了全球合作研究中的作者署名差异,讨论了已有的预防措施及其不足,并提出了一种干预措施来解决这一问题。马拉维的研究指南建议在本地进行的研究中,外国研究人员与本地研究人员进行合作。但是,最终发表的论文中并没有要求联合署名的规定。期刊对作者身份标准的建议虽然存在,但由于对指导方针的排他性解释,可能会使合作项目中的中低收入国家研究人员处于不利地位。例如,要求作者对工作的构思或设计做出实质性贡献,这可能有利于通常来自北方国家的研究资助者。为了解决问题核心的权力不对称问题,已经提出了系统和全面的变革建议。然而,这些提议可能需要很长时间才能产生变化。在此期间,地方机构可以采取更直接的行动,通过设立研究诚信办公室来执行增加合作研究中作者机会的任务,以解决不平等问题。

相似文献

7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

本文引用的文献

5
Diversity in the editorial boards of global health journals.全球健康期刊编辑委员会的多样性。
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Oct 18;4(5):e001909. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001909. eCollection 2019.
10
Coma scales for children with severe falciparum malaria.针对患有严重恶性疟原虫疟疾儿童的昏迷量表。
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1997 Mar-Apr;91(2):161-5. doi: 10.1016/s0035-9203(97)90207-8.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验