BackgroundMany exceptional researchers, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) face structural disadvantages in applying for research grants. Public engagement and crowdfunding make it possible for researchers to directly seek support from the public, by engaging large groups of people who make small contributions to support a project. This manuscript synthesizes global qualitative evidence and describes a WHO-TDR public engagement and crowdfunding pilot programme.MethodsWe searched six databases for primary qualitative and mixed-methods research. We used a thematic synthesis approach and assessed our findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. A crowdfunding approach to finance research studies was tested through a pilot programme, with a focus on infectious diseases of poverty. TDR Global mentors provided support for five finalists to engage the public and develop crowdfunding campaigns.ResultsNine studies were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. Themes were developed into seven key findings, including the need for extensive public engagement, the potential for crowdfunding to open a communication channel between researchers and the public, key correlates of crowdfunding success and the risks of crowdfunding health research with associated mitigation strategies. The TDR pilot programme received 121 entries from 37 countries. Five LMIC-based researchers received training and joined a working group. Three researchers launched their crowdfunding campaigns, met their goals and received substantial monetary and non-monetary contributions.ConclusionPublic engagement provides a foundation for effective crowdfunding for health research. Our evidence synthesis and pilot data provide practical strategies for LMIC researchers to engage the public and conduct crowdfunding campaigns.

BackgroundMany low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) researchers have disadvantages when applying for research grants. Crowdfunding may help LMIC researchers to fund their research. Crowdfunding organises large groups of people to make small contributions to support a research study. This manuscript synthesises global qualitative evidence and describes a Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) crowdfunding pilot for LMIC researchers.MethodsOur global systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis searched six databases for qualitative data. We used a thematic synthesis approach and assessed our findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. Building on the review findings, we organised a crowdfunding pilot to support LMIC researchers and use crowdfunding. The pilot provided an opportunity to assess the feasibility of crowdfunding for infectious diseases of poverty research in resource-constrained settings.ResultsNine studies were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. We identified seven findings which we organised into three broad domains: public engagement strategies, correlates of crowdfunding success and risks and mitigation strategies. Our pilot data suggest that crowdfunding is feasible in diverse LMIC settings. Three researchers launched crowdfunding campaigns, met their goals and received substantial monetary (raising a total of US$26 546 across all three campaigns) and non-monetary contributions. Two researchers are still preparing for the campaign launch due to COVID-19-related difficulties.ConclusionPublic engagement provides a foundation for effective crowdfunding for health research. Our evidence synthesis and pilot data provide practical strategies for LMIC researchers to engage the public and use crowdfunding. A practical guide was created to facilitate these activities across multiple settings.

Objectives: Self-testing for STIs such as HIV and syphilis may empower sexual minorities and expand uptake of STI testing. While much is known about HIV self-testing (HIVST), less is known about syphilis self-testing, particularly in low-income settings. The objective of this study is to determine context-specific facilitators and barriers for self-testing and to assess the usability of syphilis self-testing in Zimbabwe among men who have sex with men (MSM). Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted in Harare as part of a larger syphilis self-testing trial. The study included in-depth interviews (phase one) followed by usability testing and a second interview (phase two). In-depth interviews were conducted with MSM and key informants prior to syphilis self-testing. The same MSM then used the syphilis self-test, quantitatively assessed its usability and participated in a second in-depth interview. Phase one data was analysed using a thematic approach, guided by an adapted Social Ecological Model conceptual framework. Phase two interviews were analysed using Rapid Assessment Procedure qualitative methodology, and usability was assessed using a pre-established index, adapted from existing HIVST evaluation scales. Results: Twenty MSM and 10 key informants were recruited for phase one in-depth interviews and 16 of these MSM participated in phase two by completing a syphilis self-test kit. Facilitating factors for self-testing included the potential for increased privacy, convenience, autonomy and avoidance of social and healthcare provider stigma. Barriers included the fear to test and uncertainty about linkage to care and treatment. Data from the usability index suggested high usability (89.6% on a 0-100 scale) among the men who received the self-test. Conclusions: MSM in Zimbabwe were willing to use syphilis self-test kits and many of the barriers and facilitators were similar to those observed for HIVST. Syphilis self-testing may increase syphilis test uptake among sexual minorities in Zimbabwe and other low- and middle-income countries.

ObjectivesSelf-testing for STIs such as HIV and syphilis may empower sexual minorities and expand uptake of STI testing. While much is known about HIV self-testing (HIVST), less is known about syphilis self-testing, particularly in low-income settings. The objective of this study is to determine context-specific facilitators and barriers for self-testing and to assess the usability of syphilis self-testing in Zimbabwe among men who have sex with men (MSM).MethodsThis mixed methods study was conducted in Harare as part of a larger syphilis self-testing trial. The study included in-depth interviews (phase I) followed by usability testing and a second interview (phase II). In-depth interviews were conducted with MSM and key informants prior to syphilis self-testing. The same MSM then used the syphilis self-test, quantitatively assessed its usability and participated in a second in-depth interview. Phase I data were analysed using a thematic approach, guided by an adapted social ecological model conceptual framework. Phase II interviews were analysed using rapid assessment procedure methodology, and usability was assessed using a pre-established index, adapted from existing HIVST scales.ResultsTwenty MSM and 10 key informants were recruited for phase I in-depth interviews, and 16 of these MSM participated in phase II by completing a syphilis self-test kit. Facilitating factors for self-testing included the potential for increased privacy, convenience, autonomy, and avoidance of social and healthcare provider stigma. Barriers included the fear to test and uncertainty about linkage to care and treatment. Data from the Usability Index suggested high usability (89.6% on a 0–100 scale) among the men who received the self-test.ConclusionsMSM in Zimbabwe were willing to use syphilis self-test kits and many of the barriers and facilitators were similar to those observed for HIVST. Syphilis self-testing may increase syphilis test uptake among sexual minorities in Zimbabwe and other low-income and middle-income countries.