IntroductionHigh-income country (HIC) authors are disproportionately represented in authorship bylines compared with those affiliated with low and middle-income countries (LMICs) in global health research. An assessment of authorship representation in the global emergency medicine (GEM) literature is lacking but may inform equitable academic collaborations in this relatively new field.MethodsWe conducted a bibliometric analysis of original research articles reporting studies conducted in LMICs from the annual GEM Literature Review from 2016 to 2020. Data extracted included study topic, journal, study country(s) and region, country income classification, author order, country(s) of authors’ affiliations and funding sources. We compared the proportion of authors affiliated with each income bracket using Χ2 analysis. We conducted logistic regression to identify factors associated with first or last authorship affiliated with the study country.ResultsThere were 14 113 authors in 1751 articles. Nearly half (45.5%) of the articles reported work conducted in lower middle-income countries (MICs), 23.6% in upper MICs, 22.5% in low-income countries (LICs). Authors affiliated with HICs were most represented (40.7%); 26.4% were affiliated with lower MICs, 17.4% with upper MICs, 10.3% with LICs and 5.1% with mixed affiliations. Among single-country studies, those without any local authors (8.7%) were most common among those conducted in LICs (14.4%). Only 31.0% of first authors and 21.3% of last authors were affiliated with LIC study countries. Studies in upper MICs (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.6, 95% CI 2.46 to 5.26) and those funded by the study country (aOR 2.94, 95% CI 2.05 to 4.20) had greater odds of having a local first author.ConclusionsThere were significant disparities in authorship representation. Authors affiliated with HICs more commonly occupied the most prominent authorship positions. Recognising and addressing power imbalances in international, collaborative emergency medicine (EM) research is warranted. Innovative methods are needed to increase funding opportunities and other support for EM researchers in LMICs, particularly in LICs.
IntroductionOver half of the 5 million annual deaths among children aged 0–59 months occur in sub-Saharan Africa. The period immediately after hospitalisation is a vulnerable time in the life of a child in sub-Saharan Africa as postdischarge mortality rates are as high as 1%–18%. Identification of neonates and children who are at highest risk for postdischarge mortality may allow for the direction of interventions to target patients at highest risk.Methods and analysisThe Predicting Post-Discharge Mortality study is a prospective, observational study being conducted at Muhimbili National Hospital (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania) and John F. Kennedy Medical Center (Monrovia, Liberia). The aim is to derive and validate two, age population specific, clinical prediction rules for the identification of neonates (n=2000) and children aged 1–59 months (n=2000) at risk for all-cause mortality within 60 days of discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit or paediatric ward. Caregivers of participants will receive phone calls 7, 14, 30, 45 and 60 days after discharge to assess vital status. Candidate predictor variables will include demographic, anthropometric and clinical factors. Elastic net regression will be used to derive the clinical prediction rules. Bootstrapped selection with repetitions will be used for internal validation. Planned secondary analyses include the external validation of existing clinical prediction models, determination of clinicians’ ability to identify neonates and children at risk of postdischarge mortality at discharge, analysis of factors associated with hospital readmission and unplanned clinic visits and description of health-seeking behaviours in the postdischarge period.Ethics and disseminationThis study received ethical clearance from the Tanzania National Institute of Medical Research, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, the John F. Kennedy Medical Center Institutional Review Board, and the Boston Children’s Hospital Institutional Review Board. Findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and as peer-reviewed publications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.