Applying the <scp>ICMJE</scp> authorship criteria to operational research in low‐income countries: the need to engage programme managers and policy makers

Zachariah, Rony; Reid, Tony; Bergh, Rafaël Van den; Dahmane, A.; Kosgei, Rose J.; Hinderaker, Sven Gudmund; Tayler‐Smith, Katie; Manzi, Marcel; Kizito, Walter; Khogali, Mohammed; Kumar, Ajay M. V.; Baruani, Bienvenu; Bishinga, Aristide; Kilale, Andrew M.; Nqobili, M.; Patten, Gabriela; Sobry, Agnès; Cheti, Erastus; Nakanwagi, A.; Enarson, D. A.; Edginton, M. E.; Upshur, Ross; Harries, A. D.

doi:10.1111/tmi.12133

Cited by 22 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Possible reasons that foster this relatively rapid translation of research knowledge into practice include: participant selection that favours programme staff, studies being focused on health care delivery; research questions being of direct programme relevance; early engagement and buy-in of programme managers and/or policy makers; and inclusion of stake-holders as co-authors on publications (Zachariah et al 2013). A number of years ago Walley et al (2007) in their paper 'How to get research into practice: first get practice into research' highlighted the importance of these elements as key to influencing practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research to policy and practice change: is capacity building in operational research delivering the goods?

Zachariah

Guillerm

Berger

et al. 2014

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstractobjectives Between 2009 and 2012, eight operational research capacity building courses were completed in Paris (3), Luxembourg (1), India (1), Nepal (1), Kenya (1) and Fiji (1). Courses had strict milestones that were subsequently adopted by the Structured Operational Research and Training InitiaTive (SORT IT) of the World Health Organization. We report on the numbers of enrolled participants who successfully completed courses, the number of papers published and their reported effect on policy and/or practice.design Retrospective cohort study including a survey. methods Participant selection criteria ensured that only those proposing specific programme-related and relevant operational research questions were selected. Effects on policy and/or practice were assessed in a standardised manner by two independent reviewers.results Of 93 enrolled participants from 31 countries (14 in Africa, 13 in Asia, two in Latin America and two in South Pacific), 83 (89%) completed their courses. A total of 96 papers were submitted to scientific journals of which 89 (93%) were published and 88 assessed for effect on policy and practice. There was a reported effect in 65 (74%) studies including changes to programme implementation (27), adaptation of monitoring tools (24) and changes to existing guidelines (20).conclusion Three quarters of published operational research studies from these structured courses had reported effects on policy and/or practice. It is important that this type of tracking becomes a standard component of operational research and research in general.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research to policy and practice change: is capacity building in operational research delivering the goods?

Zachariah

Guillerm

Berger

et al. 2014

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their recent article, Zachariah et al (2013) express concern that the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria '…do not extend beyond publication and are therefore less applicable for operational research'. Apparently, there is a strong desire among key players in operational research, including scientists, policy makers and health workers, for authorship criteria that allow them to be included as co-authors of academic research publications.…”

Section: Dear Editorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response to ‘Applying the ICMJE authorship criteria to operational research in low‐income countries: the need to engage programme managers and policy makers’ by Zachariah et al. (2013) TMIH 18, pp. 1025–1028

Briët

Smith

2013

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a recent study of Nigerian researchers, 36.4% of respondents reported authorship disagreements [9]. Similarly, an editorial published by Zachariah et al describes difficulties associated with distributing authorship in research teams conducting operational research in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) [10]. These authors note that the application of guidelines on authorship often excludes recognition of important actors who have made essential contributions to research in LMICs (e.g., non-governmental organisations, policy makers).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authorship ethics in global health research partnerships between researchers from low or middle income countries and high income countries

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOver the past two decades, the promotion of collaborative partnerships involving researchers from low and middle income countries with those from high income countries has been a major development in global health research. Ideally, these partnerships would lead to more equitable collaboration including the sharing of research responsibilities and rewards. While collaborative partnership initiatives have shown promise and attracted growing interest, there has been little scholarly debate regarding the fair distribution of authorship credit within these partnerships.DiscussionIn this paper, we identify four key authorship issues relevant to global health research and discuss their ethical and practical implications. First, we argue that authorship guidance may not adequately apply to global health research because it requires authors to write or substantially revise the manuscript. Since most journals of international reputation in global health are written in English, this would systematically and unjustly exclude non-English speaking researchers even if they have substantially contributed to the research project. Second, current guidance on authorship order does not address or mitigate unfair practices which can occur in global health research due to power differences between researchers from high and low-middle income countries. It also provides insufficient recognition of “technical tasks” such as local participant recruitment. Third, we consider the potential for real or perceived editorial bias in medical science journals in favour of prominent western researchers, and the risk of promoting misplaced credit and/or prestige authorship. Finally, we explore how diverse cultural practices and expectations regarding authorship may create conflict between researchers from low-middle and high income countries and contribute to unethical authorship practices. To effectively deal with these issues, we suggest: 1) undertaking further empirical and conceptual research regarding authorship in global health research; 2) raising awareness on authorship issues in global health research; and 3) developing specific standards of practice that reflect relevant considerations of authorship in global health research.SummaryThrough review of the bioethics and global health literatures, and examination of guidance documents on ethical authorship, we identified a set of issues regarding authorship in collaborative partnerships between researchers from low-middle income countries and high income countries. We propose several recommendations to address these concerns.

show abstract

Applying the ICMJE authorship criteria to operational research in low‐income countries: the need to engage programme managers and policy makers

Cited by 22 publications

References 10 publications

Research to policy and practice change: is capacity building in operational research delivering the goods?

Research to policy and practice change: is capacity building in operational research delivering the goods?

Response to ‘Applying the ICMJE authorship criteria to operational research in low‐income countries: the need to engage programme managers and policy makers’ by Zachariah et al. (2013) TMIH 18, pp. 1025–1028

Authorship ethics in global health research partnerships between researchers from low or middle income countries and high income countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About