Background: It is becoming increasingly important for researchers to critically reflect on approaches that can have a positive impact on the health outcomes of indigenous people. Such issues are of great importance and perhaps of special relevance to researchers in the Global South, and to the African context in which we work.Objective:To share some lessons learned from our fieldwork to contribute to current knowledge and conversations on decolonising research process.Methods: We used an African lens to critically reflect upon some issues raised from individual interviews and focus group discussions with our participants which we deem to be important for consideration in a decolonising research process.Results: The major issues that we raise are about important structures such as power, trust, cultural competence, respectful and legitimate research practice and recognition of individual and communities’ health assets in a decolonising research process.Conclusions: Our paper argues for alternative approaches which are culturally appropriate for health research and for improved health outcomes of marginalised groups. In addition, we argue that participatory and transformative research methods which recognises individual and communities’ assets are needed. We hope that the lessons that we share in this paper can contribute towards a respectful and good research practice among the marginalised population groups in our context.
The experience of epilepsy is profoundly culturally mediated and the meanings attributed to the condition can have a great impact on its social course. This qualitative study used Kleinman’s Explanatory Model framework to explore traditional healers’ perspectives on epilepsy in an urban township in Cape Town, South Africa. The healers who participated in the study were Xhosa-speaking, had experience caring for patients with epilepsy, and had not received any training on epilepsy. Six individual in-depth interviews and one focus group with nine traditional healers were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide. Traditional healers identified several different names referring to epilepsy. They explained epilepsy as a thing inside the body which is recognized by the way it presents itself during an epileptic seizure. According to these healers, epilepsy is difficult to understand because it is not easily detectable. Their biomedical explanations of the cause of epilepsy included, among others, lack of immunizations, child asphyxia, heredity, traumatic birth injuries and dehydration. These healers believed that epilepsy could be caused by amafufunyana (evil spirits) and that biomedical doctors could not treat the supernatural causes of epilepsy. However, the healers believed that western medicines, as well as traditional medicines, could be effective in treating the epileptic seizures. Traditional healers were supportive of collaboration with western-trained practitioners and highlighted that the strategy must have formal agreements in view of protection of intellectual property, accountability and respect of their indigenous knowledge. The findings suggest a need for interventions that promote cultural literacy among mental health practitioners. Research is urgently needed to assess the impact of such collaborations between biomedical services and traditional healers on epilepsy treatment and care.
This study demonstrates the disjunction between what these students were taught about human rights and ethics and what they witnessed in clinical settings. The high prevalence of patient rights abuses experienced by these students highlights the need to align medical ethics and human rights with medico-legal protocols in theory and clinical practice.
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.