Building Mental Health Research Capacity in Kenya: a South-North Collaboration

Mathai, Muthoni; Stoep, Ann Vander; Kumar, Manasi; Kuria, Mary Wangari; Obondo, Anne; Kimani, Violet; Amugune, Beatrice; Mak’anyengo, Margaret; Mbwayo, Anne; Unützer, Jürgen; Kiarie, James; Rao, Deepa

doi:10.1007/s40609-018-0126-8

Cited by 9 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eighteen were part of broader capacity strengthening interventions that provided training for research skills beyond writing and publishing. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] The majority of interventions in our main sample were focused on specific content areas (table 1): five advanced operational research, three supported psychiatry and mental health, three addressed tuberculosis and two…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening research capacity: a systematic review of manuscript writing and publishing interventions for researchers in low-income and middle-income countries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHealth researchers from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are under-represented in the academic literature. Scientific writing and publishing interventions may help researchers publish their findings; however, we lack evidence about the prevalence and effectiveness of such interventions. This review describes interventions for researchers in LMICs aimed at strengthening capacity for writing and publishing academic journal articles.MethodsWe followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to report literature searches in PubMed, Embase, Global Health, Scopus and ERIC. Our keywords included LMICs, low-income and middle-income countries, health research and writing/publication support interventions, with no restrictions on publication date. Our screening process consisted of title screening, abstract review and full-text review. We collected information about the content, implementation and evaluation of each intervention, if included.ResultsWe identified 20 interventions designed to strengthen capacity for scientific writing and publishing. We summarised information from the 14 interventions that reported submitted or published papers as outcomes separately, reasoning that because they provide quantifiable metrics of success, they may offer particular insights into intervention components leading to publication. The writing and publishing components in this ‘Publications Reported’ group were an average length of 5.4 days compared with 2.5 days in the other group we refer to as ‘Other Interventions.’ Whereas all 14 Publications Reported interventions incorporated mentors, only two of five in the Other Interventions group incorporated mentors. Across interventions, leaders expressed the importance of a high ratio of mentors to participants, the need to accommodate time demands of busy researchers, and the necessity of a budget for open access fees and high-quality internet connectivity.ConclusionWriting and publishing interventions in LMICs are an underutilised opportunity for capacity strengthening. To facilitate the implementation of high-quality interventions, future writing and publishing interventions should share their experiences by publishing detailed information about the approach and effectiveness of the interventions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening research capacity: a systematic review of manuscript writing and publishing interventions for researchers in low-income and middle-income countries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Factors reported to foster coordination and monitoring included regular communication, jointly determined goals and processes, previous working relationships, and the use of codes of conduct and guidelines 60 66 67. Lack of clarity about roles and guidelines,43 50 and difficulties in organising meetings due to physical distances, time differences, conflicting partner priorities, and poor internet connectivity were reported as barriers particularly in large-sized consortia 60 68 69. Most of the 18 evaluations reported, whether internally or externally conducted, were programmatic in nature, focused on assessing training and research outputs, with only six reporting on partner relations and partnership successes and challenges.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most discussed factor reported as influencing consortium success was the importance of fostering strong relationships between partners, with nearly all papers (n=45) commenting on this. The value of informal networks and friendships among individual partners in consortium success was emphasised 26 42 43 69 72. In addition to their influence on the achievement of programme deliverables and consortium sustainability, effective relationships were in themselves seen as capacity outcomes 26 45 60 62…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Almost half of the papers (n=21) reported encountering challenges when partner differences were not acknowledged and monitored 26 29 49 68 73–76. At the same time, the investment required (in time and other resources) and practical challenges of building relationships were recognised, particularly when partners were spread across continents 29 42 50 63 69 77 78. As demonstrated in one study, participants ‘found the process of establishing relationships and reaching consensus… laborious and at times negotiation-intensive’ (p. 4) 63.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another paper identified the lack of management skills as a risk factor for consortia, criticising the reliance on the ‘learning-by-doing’ means of acquiring those skills which tends to happen late in consortia leaders’ careers 82. Some recognition of a more central capacity strengthening role of management activities was demonstrated in a few cases where partner interactions at both management and implementation levels were noted to generate exchange of knowledge and skills,69 and provide opportunities for mentoring and ‘behaviour modelling’ 73. On the significance of these processes, one author pointed out:…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Managing health research capacity strengthening consortia: a systematised review of the published literature

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLocally relevant research is considered critical for advancing health and development in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Accordingly, health research capacity strengthening (HRCS) efforts have intensified, increasingly through consortia. Yet, the knowledge base for managing such consortia is not well defined. This review aimed to ascertain the scope and quality of published literature on HRCS consortium management processes, management-related factors influencing consortium operations and outcomes, and the knowledge gaps.MethodsGiven the paucity of published HRCS literature, a ‘systematised review’ as outlined by Grant and Booth was conducted, modelling the systematic review process without restriction to research-based publications. A systematic search in PubMed and Scopus was carried out coupled with a manual search for papers using reference checking and citation searching. A quality appraisal of eligible articles using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was undertaken. Thematic synthesis was used to analyse the extracted data.ResultsThe search identified 55 papers, made up of 18 empirical papers and 37 commentaries focusing on consortium-based HRCS initiatives involving LMICs and reporting management-related data. The review indicates increasing efforts being made in the HRCS field in reporting consortia outcomes. However, it highlights the dearth of high-quality empirical research on HRCS consortium management and the nascent nature of the field with most papers published after 2010. The available literature highlights the importance of relational management factors such as equity and power relations in influencing consortium success, though these factors were not explored in depth. Operational management processes and their role in the capacity strengthening pathway were rarely examined.ConclusionFindings indicate a weak evidence base for HRCS consortium management both in terms of quantity and conceptual depth, demonstrating the need for an expanded research effort to inform HRCS practice.

show abstract

International research collaboration in Africa: a bibliometric and thematic analysis

Vieira

2022

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building Mental Health Research Capacity in Kenya: a South-North Collaboration

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

Strengthening research capacity: a systematic review of manuscript writing and publishing interventions for researchers in low-income and middle-income countries

Strengthening research capacity: a systematic review of manuscript writing and publishing interventions for researchers in low-income and middle-income countries

Managing health research capacity strengthening consortia: a systematised review of the published literature

International research collaboration in Africa: a bibliometric and thematic analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About